
Qass 
Book 



£W 



S \ 



NA 



1^1^^ 



J 



THE 



'ode and Subjects of Baptism 

EXAMINED, 



IN 



SEVEN SERMONS. 



TO WHICH IS ADDED, 



A MIXIATURE HISTORY OF THE BAPTISTS. 



BY DANIEL MERRILL, A. M. 

PASTOR OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST IN SEDGWICK. 



Doth cur law judge any man before it hear him, and know what 
he doeth ? Nicodemus. John vii. 51. 

Whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he 
cannot be my disciple. , Jesus Christ. 



TEjYTH editiok. 



BOSTO^T: 

Printed and sold by Manning ^ Loring, No. 2, Coi-nhil;. 

Sent, 1812, 



TO THE READER. 



Fellow Traveller to Eternity, 



YOU and I are the offspring of God. The period of our 
return to him swiftlv approaches. Then the motire I have had 
Ifa^Tiang, and which y™ shall have had in readrng, w.U M 
'" kno4: Hew, a,>d how far tlje foUow.ng PaS-wm affect 
»y present and future hfe, is with the Lord. . How fai they 
\l 'affect thine, is also with Him. One th.ng >s certam^ t. 
.ath of what I have written will be soon known. \ou ar 
iaiing to know it now. provided you know tl.e _valae of the 
gospel, and possess an heart humbled by its doctnnes. 

Reader be not offended at what I have written, till you b<^ 
.u^ i^^t 'fdse. Do thyself no ham. Read, consider, compar 
etery part, and the whole, with divine truth in such a manne, 
and spirit, as shall yield thee a pleasing reflection m the worli 
to come. - 

If the subject, as here presented, be true, it is a serious trutl. 
If an eiTor, it is a serious one. It neariy concerns the king 
aom of IMMANUEL, to whose pleasure and mercy the whole :; 
cheerfiuly i^signed, 



By, Reader, 
Thy Servant, 

For Jesus* sake, f 

The AUTHOP 






Sfdowick, \ 
Dfc. 27, 1804.5 



'#i 



=35^ 



The Mode and SuljeSls of Baptijin. 



SERMON I. 

MATTHEW xxvlii. 19, 20. 

[po ye J therefore^ and teach all nations ihapti'z'wg them in the name 
f of the Fat her i and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghofi \ teach- 
ji ing them to ohferve all things ivhatfoever I have commanded 
I you : Andt lo^ I am with you aliuay^ even unto the end of the 
\ world. Amen, 

IT hath pleafed the Father of Mercies to beftow on fallen 
man a revelation from heaven. In it is contained the 
fcheme of grace, which brings life and immortality to light* 
It (hows the way by which to efcape the wrath to come, and 
to find the favcm of God. All fcripture is given hj his in- 
fpiration, and is profitable foi- dc<Eliine, for reproof, for cor- 
rc<Siion, for inftru^ion in righteoufnefs ; that the man of God 

'■\ may be perfeifl, thoroughly furnifhed unto all good works. 
Till the human heart be humbled, in meafure, man feels 
not his need of divine teaching ; nor will he make the fcrip- 

' tures the man of his counfel. Bui* my brethren, and peo- 
ple, it is doubdefs the cafe that many of you po/Tefs a wil* 
lingnefs to have your principles and pTa<5lIce fquared by 
the word and teftimony of Jefus Chrift. My text contains^^ 
fome of the laft words of our great High-Prieft. It is the 
general orders which he gave his firft apoftles, and left for 
the inftruftion, pradice and comfort of all their fuccelf^rs, to 
the end of the world. In the verfe which precedes my text,, 
Chrift informs us that all power in heaven and in earth is 
given unto him. His words, therefore, are clothed with 
authority. May we hear, and fear, and be obedient. Where 
the word of a king is, there is power ; and who may fay untp 
the King of Zion, What doft thou ? 

So far as we be Chriftians, all that is nece/Tary to enforce obe- 
dience is, to know what Chrift would have us to do* Perhapjfc 
not a pafiage in all the oracles of truth contains more extenfivc 



4 - The Mode and Suhjeils [Serm. I. 

inftf U(5lion than do the words of my text. The commands are 
exceedingly broad ; the Baptifmal Inftitution comprehends all 
obedient' difciples ; and the comforting piomife is durable as 
the world. 

In my text, Chrift Jefus, the Head of the church and Lord 
of all, conftituted his prefent and fucceeding difciples to be apof- 
tles unto all nations. It contains their coramiffion, and general 
and particular orders. In it they are dire<5led 

I. To go and difciple all nations. 

II. To baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the 
Son, and of the Holy Ghoft. 

III. He dire<Sls thefe newly conftituted apoftles, and all 
their fuccefTors, to teach their baptized difciples to obferve ail 
things whatfoever he had given in commandment. 

Lafily, Far their encouragement and comfort, he adds. 
And, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the znd of the world. 
Amen. 

I fujipofe it will be expedient, and with me it is an indifpen- 
iable duty, that I lay each of thefe proportions as fairly and as 
fuliy before you as I can. But I fliall not obferve the order in 
which they lie in my text, which is as I have juft ftated them. 
For I have many things to fay unto you, in ajfreement with my 
text, but fear that you are not, all of you, able to bear them 
now. We ihall therefore begin with the 

II. Which contains Chrifl's command to baptize, in the 
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoft, 
thofe who iliall be difcipled of all nations. 

Nor do I purpofe to cjl vour attention, at this time, to the 
whole which is implied in tnis propofition. But v/hat I pur- 
pofe is, to define a few words which appertain to the ordinance, 
and then colled the fcripture account of baptifm, with fome 
other texts, which may throw light upon the fubje<fl. After- 
wards, in difcourfes which may follow, I may produce evidence, 
that my definition of baptifm is accurate and jnft ; and fhow 
how the apoftles and primitive Chriftians underftood this mat- 
ter, and how they pradlifed. When this is done, it will be eafi- 
ly feen, what is the outward and vifible part of baptifm ; and 
then the purport, end and defign of the inftitution may call for 
fome attention. 

Before I proceed to open, iiluftrate and confirm thefe partic- 
ulars, I have feveral things to fay unto you. For 1 wifh you 
to attend to the fubje<5l without partiality and without hypoc- 
rify. I pray God to remove darknefs and all prejudice from 



Serm. I.] cf Bapifm^ ^ 

your minds, that you may, indeed, come to the law and to the 
teftlmony of Jefus Chrillin this maiter. 

Ycu will confider me as under the ftrongeft worldly induce* 
ments to continue to believe and pradtife as I have heretofore 
dene; for fhould I, after iramre ccnfi deration, be ccnfirained 
to believe and pradlife differently, you will be releafed from all 
legal obligations to afford me any farther fupport ; my relations 
will, the mxft of them, probably be greatly fliocked and difpleaf- 
ed, at the report ; many, whom I highly value as ChriftianSj. 
and numbers of them zealous preachers of the gofpel, will, it 
may be, confider me as loft, and worfe than loft, to the church, 
and world : and, befides thi^, multitudes will,-no doubt, fay all 
manner of evil againft me. All this being true, with a thou- 
fand other connefted fmaller evils, and nothing of a worldly na- 
ture in profped, fave what is contained in the promife of Jefu?- 
Chrift, you cannot but conclude that I fliall proceed r.o farther 
in this matter than I am obliged to, in following the Lamb of:* 
God whitherfoever he goeth. 

Having faid thus much with refpedl to myfelf, I wllf ftili- 
add, that, ihould a change in my belief and pra<5t!ce, refpe<5llng 
the fubjeft on hand, bring me to a more full belief and practice 
of the truth, I fhall, on the whole, be a gainer. But, Ihould a^ 
change take place, and I be called to fuftain all the evils which 
I may calculate upon, and after aU be plunged myfelf into a>. 
hurtful and bewildering error, furely all the meek and lowly>' 
in heart would rather commifer ate than revile me. 

Another thing I would mention to you, fo that the Aibje<5B 
may, if it pcffibly can, meet your minds without prejudice.^ 
You ought not to fix your judgments, nor found your belief,, 
upon the arguments or corftffions nfgreat and good men, any 
farther than fuch arguments and confeiTions are conformed! 
with the fcripturcs of truth. Should we hearken to what th$: 
greateft and bf ft of men have confeflfed and aiErmed of thei 
f«bje(5t which we are about to confidei, and have our belief and^^ 
prudtice correfponding with what they have written, the matter 
would, moft evidently, go againft what we have, in time paftj. 
both believed and pradtifed. For they have very generally, or ^ 
very many of tht ni, if not all of them, confeffed, r afSrmed^^ 
however therr-pra^flrce may have been, that imrneifi-n was rhs'; 
mode P'difhfed by the apoftles and primitive chufchi This L=> 
purpofc to prove to you in its proper place. 

Whac i have more to a id, before I proceed ta the iXiaim 
bufiueis, is; to ftate a few plain truths*. 
A ^ 



6 The Mode and SubjeSfs [Serm. I, . 

1. Baptifm is a pr.fitive inftitudon, about which we can 
know nothing, as to its being a Chriftian ordinance, but from 
what Chrift, and thofe infpired by his Spirit, have taught ns,' 

2. All which we are required to believe and pra<5llfe, with 
refpe<ft to the Chriftian ordinance of baptifm, is declared to us 
by Jefus Chrift and his forerunner and apoftles, 

3. When Jefus Chrift firft inftituted the ordinance of bap- 
tifm, he, no doubt, delivered his mind fo clearly and fully upon 
the fubje<5t, that his immediate difciples and apoftles underftood 
and pradifed as he would have them. 

4. Every thing which hath, by the precepts and command- 
ments of men, been added fince, is diftincft from the ordinance, 
and makes no part of it. 

5. No man, or body of men, have any more authority to 
add to this ordinance, or to diminifh from it, than they have to 
inftitute a new one and call it Chrift's. 

6. Whenever, and wherever, this ordinance is fo changed, 
as to lofe the intent of the Inftitutor, then and there the ordi- 
nance is loft, and becomes no Chriftian ordinance at all. 

Having laid thefe preparatory obfervations, remarks and 
plain truths before you, we proceed to confider the fubjecf^ now 
on hand, which is — 

Chrift's command to baptize in the name of the Father, and 
of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoft, thofe who (hall be difcipied 
of all nations. 

What is propofed for the prefent difcourfe is — 

1. To define a few words which appertain to the ordinance 
of baptifm. Then — 

2. To collc(5l the fcripture account of baptifm, together 
with fome other texts, which may throw light upon the fubjed. 
Afterwards, in fome following difcourfes, we may — 

3. Produce evidence, that my definition of baptifm is ac^ 
curate and juft. Then fhow — 

4. How the apoftles and primitive church underftood this 
matter, and how they pra<flifed. When this is done, it will 
be eafily feen — 

5. What is the outward and vifible part of Chriftian bap» 
tifm. ,3gten— 

Laflly. The purport, end and defign of the baptifmal 
,inftitution may call for our attention. 

Agreeably to what is propofed, we are — 

I. To define a few words which appertain to the ordinance 
ef baptifm. Thefe are— 



S«rm. L] of Bapiifm. i 

1. Baptijierion, Greek; bapttfierium, 2Lnd lavacrum^ Latin;, 
a font, a badi, a waftiing place, a veiFel to waih the body in ; 
iinglifh. 

2. Baptifma and haptifmos, Greek ; Baptifma and Lotio^ alfo 
ablutia faura^ Latin ; baptifm, wafliing, facred, ceremonial 
wafhing ; Englifh. 

3. Bapttftht Greek; haptiftay Latin; one who dips, a 
baplift; Engliih. 

4. Baptizo, Greek ; bapti%o, mergOy lavoy Latin ; to baptize, 
to dip all over, to v/afh ; Knglifh. 

5. Louoy Greek ; lavo, Latin ; to wafh, to rinfe, to bathe ; 
Englifh. 

2. We are to colled the fcripture account of baptifm, to- 
gether with fome other texts which may throw light upon the 
fubjea. 

We will begin with thofe palTages which fpeak of the bap- 
lifm of John. 

1. Matih. iii. 5, 6, 7. Then Went out to him Jerufalenv 
and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, and 
were baptized of him in Jordan, confelling their fins. But 
when he faw many of the Pharifees and Sadducees come to 
his baptifm, he faid unto them, O generation of vipers, &c. 

2. Verfe 11. I indeed baptize you with water unto re- 
pentance, &c. 

3. Verfes 13, 14, 15, 16. Then cometh Jefus from 
Galilee to Jordan, unto John, to be baptized of him ; but 
John forbade him, faying, I have need to be baptized of thee, 
and, Cornell thou to me ? And Jefus anfwering, faid unto 
him, Suffer it to be fo now, for thus it beccmeth us to fulfil 
ail righteoufnefs : then he fuffered him. And Jefus, when he 
was baptized, went up ftraightway out of the water. 

4. Matth, xxi. 25, 26, 27. The baptifm of John, whence 
was it, from heaven, or of men ? And they reafoned witb 
themfelves, fayin?^. If we fhould fay, From heaven, he will 
fay unto us, Why did ye not then believe him ? But, if we 
Ihall fay, Of men, we fear the people, for all hold John as a 
prophet. And they anfwered Jefus and ikid. We cannot tell, 
&c. 

5. Mark i. 4, 5. John did baptize in the wildernefs, andl 
preach the baptifm of repentance for the lemiffion of fins. 
A»id there went out unto him all the land of Judea, and they 
of Jerufalemv and were all baptized of him in the river 0% 
Jordan, coafeffing their fins. 



S The Mode and Suhjeds [Serm. I, 

6. Verfes 8, 9, lo. I indeed have baptized you with 
water — And it came to pafs in thofe days, that Jefus came 
from Ndzareth of GaUlee, and was baptized of John in Jor- 
dan ; and ftraightway coming up out of the water, &c. 

7. Mark xi. 30. The baptifm of John, was it from 
heaven, or of men ? 

- 8. Luke iii. 3, And he came into all the country about 
Jordan, preaching the baptifm of repentance for the remiffion 
of fms. 

9. Verfes 7, 8. Then faid he to the multitude that came 

forth to be baptized of him, O generation of vipers 

bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance. 

10. Verfe 12. Then came alfo publicans to be baptized. 

11. Verfe 16. I indeed baptize you with water. 

12. Verfe 21. Now when all the people were baptized, 
It came to pafs that Jefus alfo, being baptized, &c. 

13. Luke vii. 29. 30. And all the people that heard hlm^ 
and the publicans, juilified God, being baptized with the bap- 
tifm of John. But the Pharifees and lawyers rejeded the 
counfel of God againft themfeives, being not baptized of him. 

14. Luke XX. 4. rhe baptifm of John, was it from 
heaven, or of men ? 

15. John i. 25, 26. Why baptized thou, then, if thou be 
not that Chrift, nor ±-lias, neither that prophet ? John anfwer* 
ed them, faying, I baptize with water. 

16. Vtr{t 28. Beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing; 

17. Verfe 31. That he fhould be made manifeft to Ifrael^ 
therefore am I come baptizing with water. 

18. Veife 33. He that fent me to baptize with water. 

19. John iii. 23; And John alfo was baptizing in Enon, 
near to Salim, becaufe there was much water there ; and they 
came and were baptized. 

20. John iv. i. Ihe Pharifees had heard that Jefus made 
and baptized more dikiples than John. ^ 

21. John X. 40. Beyond Jordan, into the place where^- 
John at fi: ft baptized. 

22. J^j. I 5 John truly baptized with water. 

23. Verfe 22. Beginning from the baptifm of Jnhn. 

24. yf<??jx. 37; After the baptifm which John preached. 

25. ^ds xi. 16. John indeed baptized wieh water. 

26. ylils xiii. 24. When John had firft preached, before 
ills coming, the baptifm cf repentance to all the people. 

27. ^t?j xviii. 25. tie (ApoUos) fpake and taught, d^i- 



Serm. I.] of Baptifm. 9 

gently, the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptifm of 
John. 

28. j^^s xix. 3, 4. Unto what then were ye baptized ? 
And they faid, Unto John's baptifm. Then faid Paul, John 
verily baptized with the baptifm of repentance, faying unto the 
people, that they Ihould believe on him, which fhould come af- 
ter him, that is, on Chrift Jefus. 

We will next turn our attention to thofe texts which mention 
Chrift's baptifm. 

1. Matth. xxviii. 19. Go ye, therefore, and teach all na- 
tions, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
and of the Holy Ghoft. 

2. Mark xvi. 15, 16. And he faid unto fcem. Go ye into 
all the world, and preach the gofpel to every creature ; he that 
belie veth, and is baptized, (hail be faved. 

%. John iii. 5. iixcept a man be born of water, and of the 
Spirit, &c. 

4. Verfe 22. After thefe things, came Jefus and his difci- 
ciples into the land of Judea, and there tarried with thern and 
baptized. 

5. Verfe 26. Behold the fame baptizeth, and all men 
come to him. 

6. John iv. I, 2. When therefore the Lord knew how 
the Pharifees had heard that Jefus made and baptized more 
difciples than John, (though Jefus himfelf baptized not, but 
his difci pies.) 

7. A£is iii. 38. Then Peter faid unto them, Repent, and 
be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jefus Chrilt, for 
the remiffion of fms, and ye (hall receive the gift of the Holy 
Ghoft. 

8. ^8s ii. 41. Then they that gladly received his word 
were baptized. 

9. ABs viii. 12, 13. But when they believed Philip preach- 
ing the things concerning the kingdoir,' of God and the name 
ol Jefus Cnrift, they were baptized, both men and women. 
Then Simon himfelf believed aifo, and when he was baptized, 
&c. 

10. j^ds viii. 16. Only they were baptized in the name 
of the Lord Jefus. 

11. Verfes 36, 37, 38, 39. And as they went on their 
way, they came unto a certain water ; and the eunuch faid, 
See, here is water, what doih hinder me to be baptized ? 
And Philip faid, If ihoa beiieveft with all thine heart, tliou 



10 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. I. 

mayeft. And he faid, I believe that Jefus Chrift is the Son of 
God. And he commanded the chariot to ftand ftill. And 
they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eu- 
nuch, and he baptized him. And when they were come up 
out of the water, &c. 

12. Jeis ix. 1 8. And he (Saul) arofe, and was baptized. 

13. j^as X. 47, 48. Can any man forbid water, that thefe 
fhould not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghoft 
as well as we ? And he commanded them to be baptized in 
the name of the Lord. 

• 4. jias xvi. 15. And when fhe (Lydia) was baptized, 
and her houfehold. 

15. Verfe 33. And was baptized, he (the jailer) and all 
his, ftraightway. 

16. j^as xviii. 8. And many of the Corinthians, hearing, 
believed, and were bapvized. 

1 7. ulas xix. 5 . When they heard this, they were bap- 
tized in the name of the Lord Jt fus. 

18. Aas y.\\u 19. And now, why tarrieft thou? Arife 
and be bapt'zed, and wafh away thy fms, calling on the 
name of the Lord. 

19. Rom, vi. 3, 4. Know ye not, that fo many of us SK 
were baptized into Chrift J 'fus, were baptized into his death ? 
Therefore we are buried with him by baptifm into death, that 
like as Chrift was raifed up from the dead by the glory of the 
Father, even fo we alfo fhould walk in newnefs of life. 

20. I Cor, i. 13, 14, 15 16, 17. Were ye baptized in the 
name of Paul ? 1 thank God that I baptized none of you but 
Crifpus and Gains; left any (houid fay that I had baptized in 
mine own name. And L baptized alfo the houfehold of Stepha- 
nas : Befides, I know not whether I baptized any other j for 
Chiift fent me not to baptize, but to pre ich the gofpel. 

21. I Cor. vi, II. Bat ye are waihed. 

22. I Crr xii 13. For by one Spirit are we all baptized 
inro one body,* 

23. I Cor. XV. 29. Elfe what fhall they do that are bap- 
tized for the dead ? 

24. Gal iii. 27. For as many of you as have been bap- 
tized into Chi ift, have put on Chrift. 

25. Eph. iv. 5. One baptifm. 

20. Eph. v. 2 6. That he T-night fan<5lify and cleanfe it witk 
the wafliing of water by the word. 

• This intends, as fome fypp' fe, the Baptifm of the Holy Ghoft.. 



Serm. L] of Bapiifm. 11 

27. Col. ii. 12. Buried with him in baptlfm, wherein alfo 
ye are rifen with him. 

.S. Titus \\u 5. According to his mercy he faved us, by 
the waftiing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghoft. 

29 Hek vi. 2. The doArine of baptifms.* 

30. Heb. X. 22. Our bodies wafhed with pure water. 

31. 1 Peter iii. 21. The h'ke figure whereunto even bap- 
tifm doth now fave us, (not the putting away the filth of the 
fieOi, but the anfwerof agood confcience towards God, by the 
refurreftion of Jefus Chrift. ) 

Thefe, I believe, are all the texts in the New Teftament 
which have a plain and obvious referer.ce to either the baptifm 
of John or of Chrift. They afford us the fum of all the knowl- 
edge which we can have of either the mode or fubjedls of Chrif- 
tian baptifm. What thefe paffages fay, we may believe ; what 
they do not countenance, we may not believe. I will now fet 
before you thofe paffages where waftiing is mentioned, and the 
Greek words which are ufed. 

1. Mattk vi. 17. But thou, when thou fafteft, anoint tliy 
head, and (nif>/ai) wafti thy face. 

2. Matth, XV. 2. Why do thy difciples tranfgrefs the tra- 
dition of the elders ? for they [niptontai] wafii not their hands 
when they eat bread. 

3. Matth, xxvii. 24. When Pilate faw that he could pre- 
vail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took 
water and [apenipfato) waflied his hands. 

4. Mark vii. 2. And when they faw fome of his difci- 
ples eat bread with defiled, that is to fay with {aniptois) un- 
waftien hands. 

5. Verfe 3. For the Pharifees and all the Jews, except 
they [nipfontai) waftl their hands oft, they eat not, &c. 

6. Verfe 4. When they come from the market, except 
they [hapti/ontai) wafli» they eat not ; and many ether things 
there be which they have received to hold, as the {bapiljmous) 
wafliings of cups and pots, brazen veffeU, and of tables. 

7. Verfe 5. But eat bread with {aniptois) unwafhen hands. 

8. Verfe 8 For, laying afide the commandments ' f God, 
ye hold the tradition of men, as the [baptifmout) waftiing of, 
pots and cups. 

9. Luke v. 2. And they {apeplunan) were waftiing their 
nets, 

• It is not certain that this hath any reference to Chriftian baptifin. If 
it have, it muft refer not to that only. See Do»»RiBGe io loc. 



^ 



12 The Mode and Subjeas [Serm. L 

10. Luke vH. 38. And flood at his feet, behind him, 
weeping, and began {brechein) to wafh his feet. 

11. Verfe 44. And he turned to the woman, and f -i 
unto Simon, Seeft thou this woman? I entered into thine 
houfe, thou gaveft me no water for my feet ; but ftie 
{et?rexe) hath waflied my feet with tears. 

12. Luke xi. 38. And when the Pharifees faw it, that 
he had not firft {ehaptlfthe) wafiied before dinner. 

13.^ JoIm\yi,'j, And faid unto him, Go, and inipfal) 
wafh m the pool of Siloam ;— he went his way therefore 
and {empfato) wafiied. 

14. Verfe 15. Then again the Pharifees alfo afked him 
how he had received his fight : he faid unto them, He put 
clay upon mine eyes, and I {enipfamen) wafiied and do fee. 

ij' John xiii. 5. After that he poured water into a bafon, 
and began {niptein) to wafti the difciples' feet. 

16, Verf. 6. And Peter faid unto him. Lord, doft thou 
{mpttis) wafti my feet. 

17. Ver. 5. Peter faith unto him. Thou flialt never (nlples'S 
walh my feet. Jefiis anfwered him. If I {nipfo) wafli thee not, 
thou haft no part with eie. 

^^' :. ^^^f !°- J^^"^ ^^'^^ ^^ ^"™' ^« that is (oleloumenos) 
wafhed, needeth not fave {nlpfajihai) to wafii his feet, &c. 

19. Ve-fe 14. If I then, your Lord and Mafter (enipra) 
have wafiied your feet, ye alfo ought {niptein) to wafti one 
another's feet. 

20. j^as ix. 37. And it came to pafs in thofe days that 
ihe was fick and died, whom when they had [loufantes) wafiied. 

^ 21 . Aas XVI. 7,^, And he took them the fame hour of the 
night, and {eloufeu) wafiied their ftripes. 

12. Aas xxii. 16. And now, why tarrieft thou ? Arife and 
be baptized, and {apoloufai) wafii away thy fins. 

/ r?* / 7?r* ^^* ^^- ^n^^"c^^ were feme of you: but ye 

(apeloufagthe) are walhed. ,:, ^ 

'\'^\, ^^^: T* ^^' ^^^^ h« ^'§^^ fanaifv and cleanfe it 
with (/outro) the wafiiing of water by the word. 

feel^' ' ^""' ""* '""' ^^^'^ ("''^•^'") ^^""^ ^^^^^ ^^^ ^a^nts* 

26. ^/.. iii. _y. By the {ioufrou) wafliing of regeneration, 

anF/^^.f •'''; '''> .^^]'^^ ^^^^ ^"^y «" «^^a's and drinks, 
and {dtaphorots baptifmou) divers wafiiings. 

wi4 pure tat'r."' ^*'''^ our bodies (/./.«..„.,•) wafliei 



Serm. I.] of Baptifm. 13 

29. iPeter n. 2 2. But it is happened unto them according: to 
the true proverb— and the fow ih?Lt(ioufamene) was waOied, &c. 

30. Rev. u 5. Unto him that loved us and [loufantl) 
wafhed us from our fms in his own blood. 

31. Rev. vii. 14. Thefe are they who came out of great 
tribulation, and [epiunan) have wafhed their robes in the blood 
oftheLamb** 

Thofe paflages which make mentiun of sprinkling, with the 
Greek wor-Js ufed, now call for your attention. 

1. Heb. ix. 13. For if the Wood of bulls and goats, and 
the aihes of an heifer (ranthou/a) fprinkling the unclean, &c. 

2. Verfe 19. He (Mofes) took the blood of calves and of 
goats, with water, and fcarlet wool, and hyffop, and {erratitf/s) 
fprinkled both the book and all the people. 

3. HeL X. 22. Having our hearts {errant'tfmenot) fprinkled 
from an evil confcience. .^i 

4. Hcb. xi. 28. Through faith He kept the paffover and 
the [profchufn) fprinkling of blood. 

5. ijfeh. xii. 24. And to the blood o{ (ranti/mou) fprinkling. 

6. I Pffer i. 2. And to the (r^ff///«(?«,) fprinkling of the 
blood of Jefus Chrift. < : 

Lajily. You will' now give attention for a moment to thofe 
paflages of fcripture where the word dip is mentioned. 

1. Lukexv'i. 2^. Thathe may (^(5'/)j'^') dip his finger in w^ater, 

2. Matth. xxvi. 23. And he anfwered and faid^ He that 
[emhapfas) dippeth his liand with me in the difh. 

3. Mark xiv. 20. And be anfwered and faid unto them. 
It is one of the twelve that [embaptomenos) dippeth with me in 
the difh. 

4. Johnxm. 26. And he anfwered. He it is to whom I 
fhall give a fop when I have (bap/as) dipped it ; and when he 
had (embapfai) dipped the fop, &c. 

5 Rev. xix. 13. And he was clothed with a veflure 
{^bebammenon) dipped in blood. 

A fe'v remarks on wh»\t we have paiTed over will clpfe the 
prcfent dlfcourfe. 

i.^ We fee that all the words which appertain to the ordi- 
nance of baptifm, fignify the fame which they would, provided 
immerfion were the fcripture mode. 

• Plund properly fignifies to wafli clothes ; as /c.2/0, the body ; and «/>/o, 
the face and hands. 

B 



14 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. II. 

2. We fee that the fubje^H: of baptlfm is very repeatedly 
mentioned in the New Teftarnent. It is brought to view ex- 
prefsly In about threefcore paflages. 

3. Whenever baptifm is mentioned, and neither the word 
haptvzo nor hapufmos is ufed» the word fubftituted plainly inti- 
mates that bathing or wafhing the body all over, is the mode ; 
for this is the fignification of louoy which is the word, and the 
only word, which the fcriptures employ in the room of hapti%o* 

4. Whenever bapti-zo or baptlfmos is tianflated wafhing, a 
ceremonial and not a common wafliing is manifeftly intended. 

5. We find that in all the places where fprinkling is men- 
tioned, the original words, rhantizo, ^xA profchufiriy are very dif- 
ferent from hapti%d and haptijmos. 

6. You will pleafe to obferve, that wherever we find, 
through the New Teftament, the word, to dip, it is from the 
fame theme whence haptixo comes; 

7. We fee that every thing looks as though immerfion might 
be the mode ; and, as for fprinklingt there is, to fay the leaft, 
nothing which looks like it. 



SERMON II. 

MATTHEW xxvlii. 19, 20. 

Go ydy therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name 
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghofl ; teaching 
them to obferve all things whatfoever I have commanded you : 
And, lo, I am with you alnvay, even unto the end of the 
world. Amen, 

THE bufinefs which we are now upon depends very much 
upon the definitions of certain words, and principally 
upon the definition of the word baptize, and upon the certain 
evidence of fuch definition or definitions being accurate and 
juft. For we can no other wife under ftand what God the Lord 
faith unto us, than by knowing the import of the words by 
which he is pleafed to communicate his will. The great 
Teacher who came from God, hath doubtlefs communicated 
his mind fo explicitly that the humble in heart may know the 
common matters which relate to faith and practice. If we 
devoutly fearch the fcriptures, and feek wifdom as filver, and 



Serm. II.] of Baptifm. 15 

fearch for her as for hid treafures, God will make us to under- 
ftaiid knowledge, and to ferve hini with acceptable pra<5tice. 
The Spirit of the Lord hath moft certainly chofen acceptable 
words, words of definite meaning. We are to fearch out their 
fignification, and to be obedient. I cannot judge of their fig- 
nification for you, nor can I anfwer for the judgment which 
you fhall make up, nor can you for me. 

1 am by my office obliged to exhibit, fo far as I can, all 
thofe divine truths which rel?«^e to faith and pradice. I am 
obliged to believe arid praftife according to the heft li.£^ht 
which I can gather, or have in any way afforded me. You 
are under fimilar obligations, 

Whilft we proceed, I wifli you to believe fully two things ; 
one is, that truth, if believed and pradifed, will not, on the 
whole, harm you. The other is, that the moft fure way to 
acquire truth is, to be of a humble and obedient mind, ready- 
to receive the truth. For God refifteth the proud, but giveth 
grace to the humble. 

In the preceding difcourfe, we attended to the definition of 
certain words which appertain to the ordinance of baptifm ; 
and then coUefted the fcripture account of baptifm, together 
with fome other texts which are fuppofed to throw light upon 
the fubjeft under confideration. In this difcourfe we are — 

3. To produce the more dire<5t evidence that my defini- 
tions of baptifm and to baptize are accurate and juft. 

The definition which I gave of baptifm was, a ivajhingy ^fa- 
credi a ceremonial wafhing. I will now add to this definition, 
that it is immerfion, or dipping one all over in water. 

The definition which I gave of the woru bapti%o is, to dip all 
over, t6 wafh. I will alfo add, that the word fignifies, to wafh 
the body, or any thing, all over. What I mean is, that thefe 
are the fignification of ihe words bnptlfma and haptlszdf which are 
rendered baptifm, and, to baptize. 

I am now to produce evidence, that this is a juft and accurate, 
definition of the. words. 

You will obferve, that this is quite different horn xht fuhjeds 
of baptifm ; that is another fubje<fl, which muft be attended to 
in its place. 

The evidence which I have to offer, in order to fix precifely 
the juft fenfe and meaning of the words baptifm and to baptize^ 
is containjcd in the following fafts. The 

I ft. Comprifes what the Greek Lexicon, Concordance, and 
two Englifti Dii^tionaries, teftify of the words. 



T : Mcdc a-rd Z'A'^^- -■ If. 



Jiing ; to hck, dip in, duck 



'iZxd of 

vcrtdulth 
. fellowftj p 

id rcfurr- .re, 

after. T .; cc defines 



i 



y.rjLinfr at, 

Baptlzedf «i^-. 11*1 •.■.'_« L >» i.ap 

1. ' " ' -:r the pi 

in u . cither the 

f In ancient times, 

perfons i) initiated 

J ; but in i>;c time of Conftan- 

^ , .:cs on pur r>'fe to baptize in, 

• in great citici, which waj [ ! in tlic eafttrn 

-;.u v.4;;;rr r .,.'tj\^^ \yj (dipping the |^.i.,i.-, but in protelii 

of time, :tern and colder countries, fprinkling was 

i ' ' vi;.';r of dipjpijtg; which wa* the origin of out 




'i. 



2 i V ! . ; ;j''Ht fome of the attendant or circtimnantial 
fa/tf, wKirk >, rcUrion to iJic ordinance of baptifm, that 
; cm and jud^e for yourfclvet, whether the 

; . appear jutt. 

■ \i\i7,t<i IK tJie river Jordan. 

, baptizing in linoo, bccaufe there was much wat?r 
there. •^'- 

1 *- - rr.e of the dj|fc where baptifm was adminiflcred, is 
, or i^rjpii/IdMjKktch ri2nifies a place in which to wa(L 
.!! o.cr. ^•^ 
i.'.'u\fi'j: to dip, plunge, immcrfc, or wafh the body 

■iific^ one who dips, plunge;, or wafhcs the bodr 
ti iu W4ter. 



I^tir, 



/ T^^^-Ts 



-.yiv:^ 



-jr^i.^ v«.-. 



17 



^SMC an rwiwtf Jiang. ^^::.tf &:dfi^r ^^^^^^^^^ ^ - ^T^ ^^^^^ i^ 

ii^NfitS^ ? S»f|x£l^^^ - - '■ V. . .. -..^ i^ |WGC t»d JEtfW*- 

frtjc tj* 

Sir v^?! i: -^i^ iKiiida is8T« 1««3b tofittpp^ ^ 

iav« ski; . ^^tcmSET^ liiilda t;£f ' frrts a ^fTgwfrw B «f 

^* V- ■ - ■■^= v' -:* ' ' ;^-Te ^"«B5 jocr OBc JBdkkor 

V «iei£& ^ fffop^ dot %)iis^ 

r jJftfiBBijBwic asm- 
' -1^ 



:j«3£TS8l. 









B 2 



] 8 The Mode and Subjecis [Serm. IL 

This matter will have farther attention in another place. 

3. Tl:e words hapufmos and bapti%d have two, and only 
two, tranfl?itions in the New-Teftament. Thefe two are, 
hapiifm and luaJJjing, They are very generahy rendered, 
laptijmy or to bapn%e. This is their ufual tranflanon. But 
feveral times in Mark, Luke^ and in the Epillle to the Hebrews, 
they are rendered wafhing. As th&wafliing of pots, and cups, 
and brazen velTels and tables, or feats on which they reclined, 
when they ate meat ; and diaphoroh baptifmois in Hebrew is 
rendered divers nvaJJolngs. 

In the law given by Mofes, the people were, on many oc- 
cafions, to bathe their bodies, and wafli their clothes in water ; 
and alfo to put their pots and cups and brazen vefTels into wa- 
ter, that they might be cleanfed from ceremonial uncleannefs. 
To thefe legal ceremonies tJie Pharifees had added traditional 
ones, which were, no doubt, obferved in the fame manner as 
ihofe appointed by the Lord. If fo, then the wafhing of pots, 
&c. in Mark, was putting them into water, as the command 
was to do, Lev'it. xi. 32. The divers wafkings in Heb, ix. 10. 
were ceremonial wafhings, or bathings, in which the body was 
wafhed, or dipped. Numb. xix. 19. This being the cafe, does 
not this matter go to confirm, or determine, what is the defini- 
tion of baptifm ? 

4. We will now mention a few noted witnefles, who have 
given their teftimony as to the meaning of the word bapti%d. 

Calvin, a V3ry warm oppofer of the Baptifls, Ihall, as a wit- 
nefs in this caufe, fpeak firft. His teftimony is, Howbeit, the 
very word of baptizing fignifieth to dip." 

Zanchiu?, as brought forward by the Rev. Mr. Butterworth, 

which thepradice of many Chriflians, for two or three hundred years pafV, 
has giyen to the v/ord. 

Had all lexicons, and all didionaries, for the two laft centuries, borne 
united teflimony, that one fenfc of the word baptizd was to fprinkle, it 
would not have heen half fo unaccountable as it now is that they have fo 
generally retained the ancient and primitive fignijfications, and refufed to 
v.dopt the modern one, which prejudice, convenience and modern pra<5lice 
■iave given to it. Indeed, could a thoufand modern lexicons and di<Slionaries 
be found, which ihould fay, lo fprinkle is onefenfe in which bapilzo is ufed, 
k would all come to nothing, unlefs they fhould tcflify that this is one of its 
iincicnt and primitive fignifications : and even then, it would come to no 
iuore than this, that the word is lefs determinate, than it is now fuppofed 
to be. Could they do this, it would be ftill nothing, unlefs they prove the 
icriptures uf^ it in this fenfc, which they cannot do, But if they could, it 
would not be fully to their point, unlefs they can fliow that it is thus ufed in. 
•ipplicfttion to the oidijiante, 



1 



I 



4 



Semi. II.] of Baptifm. 19 

ihall be my next witnefs. He fays, bapti%d is to immerfe, 
plunge under, to overwhelm In water. 

I could quote, or bring forward, a multitude of witnefles, 
and all from our own order, the Pedobaptifts, to prove the 
fame point. But in the mouth of two or three witnefles, if 
they be good ones, every word fliall be eftablifhed. We will 
therefore produce but one more ; that fhall be good Dr. Owen. 
** For the original and natural fignlfication of it {hapti%d) figni- 
fies to dip, to plunge." 

5. 1 will mention to you a Greek word, which Paul re- 
peatedly ufes, as fignifying the fame thing as baptizo, and 
where he means the fame thing, namely, baptifm. 

In I Cor. vi. ii. Paul, fpeaking to the Corinthians of di- 
vers kinds of vile finners, fays, " And fuch were fome of you ; 
but ye are waflied," &c. 

Epk V. 26. That he might fandlfy and cleanfe it (the 
.church) with the lua/htng of water, by the word. 

Heb. X. 22. Let us draw near with a true heart. In full af- 
furance of faith, having our hearts fprinkled from an evil con- 
j |pf!;fcience, and our bodies ivajhed with pure water. 
'S^ The Pedobaptifts acknowledge that ivajhing^ in thefe texts, 
means baptifm^ and I- know not that^ny of them deny it. Bap- 
tifm and wafhing appear to be ufed as fynonymous words, or 
as words fignifying the fame thing. If this be the cafe, then 
the two words, baptizo and huo, which are tranflated, one to 
baptize, and the other to waih, mean the fame thing, and are 
thus intended by the Apoftle. Then, provided we can deter- 
mine what louo means, we can alfo determine what is the figni- 
fication of baptizo. This word, louut fignlfies to wafh, and to 
bathe the body in water ; for thus it is generally If not univer- 
fally ufed, and from It Is loutron, a bath, or place to wafh the 
body in. Befides, tlie word louo is never ufed in the New-Tef- 
tament, nor any where elfe, to my knowledge, to fignlfy either 
fprinkling or common wafhing. Its appropriate fenfe appears 
to be, bathing, or wafhing any thing all over ; as you may fee, 
yi^s ix. 37. and xvi. 33 ; 2 Peter ii. 22 ; which are the only 
places where I recollect the word /o«o is ufed, fave where the 
ordinance of baptifm appears to be referred to. This being- 
the cafe, the matter appears jufl as it would, provided the or- 
dinance included the bathing of the body in water. This is 
letting fcripture Interpret itfelf ; and the interpretation which 
it gives Is, baptifm Is bathing, or wafhing the body in water. 
This, therefore; may help you a lijCtle towards determining in 



20 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm, IL -^ 

your minds what is the fignification of baptt%Q, For louo is 
repeatedly ufed in fcripture, as importing the fame mode of "\\ 
wafhing which is commanded in the ordinance of baptifm. * 

6. Paul's defcription of the mode of baptizing, or of what 
is done to thofe who are baptized, may afford you farther 
light upon the fubjeft. , 

Paul brings this matter up to the Roman and Coloffian 
Chriftians, as a matter well known to them. To the former 
he fays, Rom. vi. 4. Therefore we are buried with him by 
baptifm into death, that like as Chrift was raifed up from the 
dead by the glory of the Father, even fo we alfo fhould walk 
in newnefs of life. To the other he fays, CoL ii. 12. Buried 
with him in baptifm, wherein alfo ye are rifen with him, 
through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raifed 
him from the dead. 

Upon thefe texts, Dr. Doddridge has the following note. \ 

" It feems the part of candour to confefs, that here is an allu- 
fion to baptifm by immerfion, as was moil ufual in thefe early 
times." Here the good dodlor fays, " as was moji ufual .*" 
this 1 fhall, by and by, explain to you." 

In the mean time, you will pleafe to pay due attention to 
what was done to thofe who were baptized, and which ap- 
pears to b^ familiar to the Roman and Coloffian Chriftians. 
The Apoftle makes no remarks, and explains nothing to them, 
but fpeaks to them as though they would and did well under- 
ftand what he meant, when he faid, " We are buried with 
him by baptifm unto death ;" and, " Buried with him in 
baptifm," It is plain faft, that Paul thus fpeaks, and it alfo 
appears, very plainly, that he had no apprehenfion but that he 
Ihould be underftood. 

Bifliop Hoadly's declaration appears to be much in point : 
* If baptifm,* fays he, *had been then,' /'. e. in the apoftles* 
days, * performed as it is now among us, we (hould never have 
fo much as heard of this forni of expreffion, of dying and rif- 
ing again in this rite.^* 

Thefe things I have thought it my duty to lay before you, 
that I might affift you, by a number of plain fadts, to form a 
judgment, each one for himfelf, what the meaning of baptifm 
is, and what the word to baptize fignifies. 

I have ftill more light upon this fubje<5^, and Ihall, in the 
next difcourfe, lay it within your view. It will perhaps be, to 
fome of you, more convincing than any thing which I have as 
yet exhibited. 33ut previoufly I will make one obfervation, 



Serm. IL] of Bapijfm. 21 

and it is this : all the evidence which we have bee.i exhibiting, 
we have on one fide of the qutftion ; and, if I miftake not, 
none on the other to countera<5l it : for if my memory and 
judgment be correal, the vifeft and beft of men, of our own 
denomination, have a/ferted, that thefe things are io, I do not 
fay that all good men have ; but the moft learned have, ajd 
fome who have appeared very pious. 

But you will fay, Why have they net pra<5Hfed differently, 
if they have thus believed ? I am not anfwerable for their prac- 
tice ; but, if the Lord will, I ihall, ere long, give you the rea- 
fons which they affign. 

I (hall only add, for the prefent, two or iliree confequences, 
and then leave the fubje<5l for your confideration. 

1. The Baptifts have, againll our pradice, and for theirs, 
that kind of evidence which is, perhaps, in all cafes but the 
prefent, confidered the moft unequivocal and certain. This 
evidence is given in by a cloud of witneffes, who, whilft they are 
bearing their teftimony, condemn themfelves every fentence 
they utter. If thefe men, who are confefTed by both fides to 
be both pious and learned, may be believed, the caufe will moft 
cei tainly be determined againft us ; for there was never a 
clearer cafe. They unitedly teftify that the fcripture mode of 
bapufm is immerfion, but omit the praftice. In this they con- 
demn themfelves. ',**' 

2. The fcripture fenfe, and, for aught appears, the only 
fenfe, of baptifm, is, dipping, immerfion, burying in water, be- 
ing overwhelmed, and the Eke. 

3. We are brought to this dilemma, either to commence 
Baptifts, as to the mode, or do as our fathers have done, con- 
lefs the truth in theory, and negleft it in pra(flice. 



SERMON III. ^ 

MATTHEW xxviii. 19, 20. 

Go yey therefore, and teach all nations ^ baptizing them in the name 
of the Father i and of the Son^ and of the Holy Ghoji ', teach- 
ing them to obferve all things nuhatfoever 1 have commanded 
you : And, lo, I am with you altuay, even unto the end of the 
"jjorld. Amen. 

MEN, brethren, and fathers, we are ftill upon a very im- 
portant fubjeft — a fubje(ft which high]) corcerns us as 
Chriftians — a fubje<^ in which our feelings, our reputation, and 



y 



3\ 



22 T/je Mode and Suhjeds {^Serrn. III. 

our peace too, may not be a little concerned. Many things, 
not to fay every thing, call upon us not to ^o too faft ; and, 
at the fame time, obedience to our common Lord forbids all 
backwardnefs, in purfuing where his truth and Spirit lead us. 

All which I requeft of you is, with candour hear, wiih 
rcadinefs obey, what truth fhall dictate. 

Should we, after long and ferious deliberation, be obliged to 
believe and praflife differently from what we have heretofore 
done, we ihall be much expofed to two things ; one is, to be 
reviled ; the other, to revile again. What we ftiall need is, 
patience to bear the one, and grace that we may avoid the other. 

Perhaps human nature is more inclined to notliing than to 
an overbearing fpirit. It Is perfectly confonant with human 
nature to make ourfelves, and not the fcriptures, the ftandard r 
of both faith and practice. The natural confequence of 
this is, cenfure againft all who dare to think, or aft, as we do 
not. To guard you againft unreafonable and common preju- 
dice, I will, for your confideration, fuggeft a thought, which 
w^e may do well to remember ; and it is this : many, who 
fhall believe and praftife as w^e have long done, may be as 
honeft and faithful as we then were. This being true, the 
following confequence is plain, that the line of condudl which 
the Baptifts ought to have pradlifed, in months and years paft, 
towards us, the fame, if we be Baptifts, will it become us to 
purfue with relation to otiiers. It requires not much forefight 
to difcover, that we fliall need much of that wifdom which is 
profitable to diredt. 

Whilft it may be indifpenfable with us to ufe every prudent 
mean to diffule that light which God may gracioufly afford us, 
it will be our wifdom to do every thing in fuch a manner as 
not to heighten, but, if poffible, to lower the prejudices of 
good people. 

Whilft you, my dear friends and people, know that light 
chafeth away the darknefs, and that truth will ultimately pre- 
vail againft every error ; rfolicit your candour and prayerful 
attention, that error may not be retained, or prevail againft 
any of us, to our wounding. 

Our attention hath already been called to the definition of 
a number of words, which relate to the ordinance of baptifm, 
to the fcripture account of baptifm, together with forrie other 
texts, which were fuppofed to throw light upon the fuhjeft, 
and alfo to fonr^e evidence in fupport of the given definitions. 
As the great queftion turns upon what is commanded, and as 





Serm. II.] of Bapfifm. 2S 



that cannot be otKerwife known than by making fure the im- 
port of the words ufed, we fhall therefore feareh for additional 
light and certainty, by inquiring — 

4. How the apoftles and primitive Chriftians \inderftood 
this matter, and how they pradlifed. 

If this can be made plain, then, perhaps, your minds will be 
fatisfied, and your judgments made up. 
I proceed to lay the evidence before you. 
There appears no neceffity of fpending time to prcwiuce evi- 
dence that the apoftles underftood the matter to be as I have 
proved to you that it was : for they, no doubt, underftood the 
words which Chrift fpake, and the commands which he gave : 
befides, if the apoftles and primitive church pra<5lifed thus, it is 
evident that they thus underftood it ; for doubtlefs they, ef- 
pecially the apoftles, were honeft men, and pradifed as they 
underftood Jefus Chrift to have directed them. 

I will here make two obfervations to you j and I wifh you 
to remember them. 

The firft is, no perfon fhould, efpecially in important mat- 
, ters, make up his judgment, that any particular fubjeft is true, 
I till he has evidence of its truth. 

^ The other is, the beft proof which the nature of any cafe 
admits of, may and ought to be confidered as evidence, and fo 
received by us, as to thofe things we are called to believe and 
pi:a<flife. 

There are different degrees of evidence : the higheft kind 
produces knowledge. When the evidence is fmall, it produces 
a weak and dubious belief. But where it is fuch that, on fup- 
pofition the thing be true, the evidence could not be greater 
than it is, there we are obliged to yield our affent, and we do 
violence to our reafon if we will not believe. 

The evidence, which we have with refpeft to the practice 
of the apoftles in 'the matter of baptizing, diifers in degree, 
and, in fome meafure, in kind, from the evidence which we 
have refpe<5ling the practice of the church in later ages as to 
the fame matter. But if we have, with refpedl to the pradlice 
of both, the beft evidence which the different cafes admit of, 
we are under obligation to believe the evidence good, and the 
fa(5ls true which are fupported by it. 

We have much the fame kind of evidence with refped to 
the pra(?lice of the apoftles, which we have as to the pradice 
of the church for many ages after them. Mr. Baxter, bifhop 
Hoadly, and others, teftify, that the apoftolic pra<5tice was, 



«» 



ml.i 



24 * The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. III. 

immerfion. We have, moreover, as to their praftice, a much 
higher kind of evidence. In fupport of their pra<5lice, I fliall 
produce the beft kind of evidence, and afterwards, whilft fpeak- 
ing of the pradlice of the church in fucceeding ages, may oc- 
cafionally bring forward fome of the other kind of evidence, 
in fupport of the apoftles' pradtice. 

As to the pra(5lice of tlie apoftles, in the. adminiftration of 
baptifm, I obferve, we have in the fcrlptures four diftin<5l 
fources of evidence. The 

1 ft. is this. When baptifm Is mentioned by the difciples 
and ap^ftles, and the common word is not ufed, they uniform- 
ly employ one particular word, and this word is of very deter- 
minate fignification, and exprefTes the bathing, or wafbing, of 
the body in water, as Heb, x. 2 2 : Having our bodies {leloumenoi) 
tvajhed with pUre water. Ads xxii. 16. Arife and be baptiz- 
ed, and {apoloufai) wa(h away thy fins. 1 Cor. vi. 11. But 
ye are {apoloufajlhe) ivajloed. By the determinate fignification 
of tliis word, their pra<5i:lce appears to be immerfion. 

2. The apoftles were commanded to dip, immerfe, or 
plunge all over in water, the perfons whom they admitted to 
this ordinance. This is evident from the determinate fignifi- 
cation of the word to baptize. Says the command, Go ye, 
therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them, &c. We 
liave before proved what is the fignification of this word, and 
confequently what Chrift commanded his difciples, when he 
fent them to baptize. 

I do not now fay that the apoftles immerfed any ; but this 
is what I fay, they were commanded thus to do. I leave it for 
you to determine, whether they did, or whether they did not. 

3. I obferve to you, that the New-Teftament, wherever it 
fpeaks of the apoftles baptizing any, fays they immerfed them, 
or dipt them all over in water. For this is the plain, literal 
and common, if not the only fignification of the word. I ft ill 
leave it with you to determine whether the apoftles did, or did 
not, praftife thus. 

Left fome of you may have forgotten what I^have before 
proved to you, and confequently entertain fome doubt whether 
baptifm may not fometimes fignify the application of water in 
a different way ; we will make two or three obfervations. 

1. The phin, literal and common fignification of the word 
is to immerfe, Overwhelm, dip, or to plunge all over. 

2. There appears to be no evidence that it is ever ufed fo 
much as once, in any part of the Bible, to fignify the applica- 



Serm. III.] of Bapilfm, 25 

' . ^ Jr in any other fenfe. Even In thofe pnlligcs where 
rime pall fuppofcd ihat the mcaninp^ might" be, and 
probably was, "Mtijbing witliout immerfion, ilie fenfe appears to 
be putting into water or immerfion, and not what we com- 
monly unJerftand by the word wafliing. Of this you may be 
convinced by confiderinj; tlie treatment to which the Jews were 
accuftomed with rcfp?j5l to thofe veffels wliich were ceremo- 
nially unclean. They were to baptize them, or put them into 
water, as you may fte, I.evlt. xi. 32. " And upon whatfocvcr 
any of them, when they are dead, doth fall, it fliall be unclean ; 

hcther it be any veffel of wood, or raiment, or (kin, or fack ; 
uhalfoever vijfd it he, wherein any work is done, it muft be put 
int9 ivaUr^ and it fljall be unclean until the even ; fo it fliall be 
clcanfcd." 

7,. I will obferve to you tliat it would moft vifibly be a re- 
riedlion upon the great Teacher who came from God, to fup- 
pofe that he fhould, when appointing a pofitive inftitution, ufe 
words afide from their plain and commonly received fenfe ; that 
too without giving any inlimatiou of his ufing the words In any 
fenfe differing from ihe common, efpecially when he was fet- 
ting up a new inftitution, about which his moft faithful follow- 
ers could, in all fucceeding generations, know nothing bnt from 
the words ufed in and about tlie inftitution. Does not all tliis 
appear plain and reafoiiable ? 

Now the Bible in the plain, literal and common fenfe of 
the words whitli it ufes, fays, the apoftles dipt, plunged or 
immcrfed all fuch as ihey admitted tn baptlfm. You will 
judge for ycurfelvcs whtilier the apoftles pra^ifed ihus, or 
whether they did not. 

4. ' The pradllce of the apoftles is farther illuftratcd and con- 
firmed by what Paul tells the Roman and Colrffi m Ch-iftians, 
with vtfyta to what took place when they received the ordinance 
of baptifm. He fays to the foimer, '* We are buried wiih him 
by bHpnfrr ,nto death :" To the other he fays, - Buried v^irh 
hi ""'"v,' f'^"^OP'«aks of this matter as a thing peifedly 

u:i . by Chriftians in his time, and ufed it as an arcurrent 

to piomoic their weanednef. from the world, and growth In 
fan^ification. Bur have you not either paffed over th-fe ard 
iimilar p:.ft:-,gcs. withrut i oi'ci. g ihcm, cr corfidered ib^m 
rather Iiard to be underllood > But hou eafy is it to undr rftand 
them, provided the apoftlts pra<51'icd ^s the fcrl-trres ^ay ^hcv 
did ! I 11,11 'eave it with you to determine tor youriclvcs how 
the apoftles piaftifed. 



26 The Mode and Suhjeds [Serm. III. 

This is the beft evidence which the nature of the fiibje(5l ad- 
mits. This matter, the apoftles' pradllce, was tranfa<^ed many 
ages fince. We have the ceftimony of the fcriptures as to what 
it was ; this is evidence enough : however, we fliall occafionally 
add the teftimony of men. 

We Ihall now attend to the practice of the church, and difcov- 
er, if we can, how it was for ages after the apoftles. The beft ev- 
idence which this part of my fubjed: admits, is that of human 
teftimony.* I by no means reft the merit of the caufe on this 
evidence. At the fame time, it may weaken the prejudices of 
ibme, and be a mean of confirming others in the belief of the 
truth. 

It appears fo plain a cafe that we can hardly rcfufe aftent to 
it, that as the church hath for a feries of ages pradlifed, fo have 
they believed. When we (hall fee what their pra<5tice hath 
been, we fhall the more eafily concede tliat their belief hath been 
ftmilar. 

What is now before us is to produce and to receive evidence 
relative to the pra<ftice of tlie primitive church. It is the fol- 
lowing : — 

I. This evidence confifts in the united teftimony of both 
thofe who pradlifed the adminiftration of the ordinance by im- 
merfion, and thofe who ufed fprinkling, and called it baptizing. 

Mofheim, a very noted church hiftorian, and not very friend- 
ly to the Baptifts, bears direft teftimony that John, Chrift's 
forerunner, and the church in the firft ages of Chriftianity, 
pradifed immerfion as the mode of baptizing. The following 
you may take as a fample of his evidence. " The exhortations 
of this refpe<flable meftenger (John) were not without eSe<5l; 
and thofe who, moved by his folcmn admonition, had formed 
the refolution of corre<5ting their evil difpofitions, and amending 
their- lives, were initiated into the kingdom of the Redeemer 
by the ceremony of immerfion, or baptifm.^f 

Speaking of the church in the fecond century, he fays, " The 
perfons that were to be baptized, after they had repeated the 
creed, coiifefted and renounced their fins, and particularly the 
devil in his pompous allurements, were immerfed under water, 

* Chri{l*s promife to his apoftles, to their fucccffors, and to the Church 
may affure us, that the ordinance of baptifm, by which his people fhould 
be diflinguilhed from the world, would ever continue. Therefore could 
•we know what the Church hath always pradifcd, efpecially that part of 
it which hath been moft feparate from the world, then their pradlice would 
aford a ftrong argument in favour of what the inflituti^n intended. 

f Century I. chap, iii fed 3. 



o*? 



Serm. III.] of Baptifm. 2/ 

and received into Chrift's kingdom by a folemn invocation of 
Fatlier, Son, and Holy Ghoft, according to tlie exprefs command 
of our bleffed Lord.* The Doaor fpeaking of fome inferior 
fe^s of the feventeenth century, and particularly of a fed called 
Coll egiants, fays, «' Thofe adult perfons, that defire to be bapti- 
zed, receive the facrament of baptifm according to the ancient 
and primitive manner of celebrating that inftitution, even by 
immerfion.^^^ 

Mr. Bailey, in his Etymological Englifh Didionary, fays, 
** In ancient times, this (baptifm) being performed by im- 
merfion, the perfons fo initiated went into a river, &c. and were 
plunged." 

John Calvin, in his InJIltuticns, Book IV.<=chap. xv. fed. 19, 
fays, " It is certain that the manner of dipping was ufed of the 
old church." 

Here are three fubftantial witnefTes. Thefe might be fufti- 
cient, feeing there is not one to be found who will, or dares, give 
dire<a and pofitive teftimony againft the truth of what thefe 
affirm. But fmce there are an hod who (land ready to give in 
their teftimony, even againft their own pra<5tice, we will hear 
what two more of them will teftify relative to the important 
caufe now on trial. 

Thefe two fhall be Dr. Cave and the famous Mr. Baxter. 

Dr. Cave, a great fearcher into antiquity, fays, " That the 
party baptized was wholly immerfed, or put under water, which 
was the common^ conjlant and univerfal cuftom of thofe times ; 
whereby they did fignificantly exprefs the great end and effeds 
of baptifm, reprefen ting Chrift's death, burial and refurre<51:ion, 
and, in conformity thereto, cur dying unto fm, the deftrudion 
of its power, and our refurreftion to a new courfe of life," &c.t 

Moft remarkable is the teftimony which Mr. Baxter gives to 
this truth, in the following words : " It is commonly confefted 
by us to the Baptifts, (as our commentators declare) that in the 
apoftles' time, the baptized were dipped overhead in water, and 
this fignifieth their profeffion both of believing the burial and 
refurred^ion of Chrift, and of their own dying unto fin, and liv- 
ing, or rifing again to newnefs of life, or being buried and rifen 
again with Chrift, as the apoftle expoundeth baptifm. Col. ii. 
12, and Rom. iv. 6. And though (faith he) we have thought it 
lawful to difufe the manner of dipping and to ufe lefs water, yet 
we prefume not to change the ufe and fignification of it ; fo thea 

• Century II. part ii. chap. v. fe<5b. i a, f Vol. v. p. 488, 
\ Teti Letters. 



28 The Mode and Subjects [Serin. HI. 

he that fignally profed^!? to die and rife again in baptifm with 
Chrift, doth fignally profefs favlng faith and repentance ; but this 
do all they that are baptized according to the apoftolic 
praftice. "* 

As thefe witnefles teftlfy, fo do all learned and pious men who 
have critically attended to this fubje<fl, and afterwards given in 
any d:re<fl- and pcfuive evidence upon the matter. 

2. The evidence as to the pradice of the primitive church, 
confifts in the teftimcny of men to this truth, that the church 
did for thirteen hundred years practife immerfion, fome extreme 
cafes excepted. 

The only evidence which I purpofe to give in fupport of this 
for the prefentj is the teftimony of the author of Ten Letters to 
Biiliop Hoadiy upon the mode and fabjects of baptifm, and the 
ccnfeinon of Dr. I.athrop that it was even fo. 

The auihof of the Letters afferts that this was the praftice of 
the church for thirteen hundred years after the commencement 
of the Chriftian era. Dr. Lathrop affents that this was the fa(5t ; 
as ycu may fee, by reading his four fermons on baptifm, where 
he gives ihefe letters a particular attention, and is fuppofed to 
aiFcnf;, where he makes no obje<fl:ion. 

3. Ail the churches in Europe, Afia and Africa, ever have 
done, and do now, pradllfe immerfion, fave thofe who are now, 
or have been, under the jurifdidion of the Pontiffs of Rome. 

The fame witneffes who bore their teftimony to the lad 
particular, give in their evidence in fupport of this, and in the 
iame wiy ; the one afferting the fa(fl:, the other aiTenting that 
it is even fo. 

4. The very reafons which have been given and which are 
ftill given to juftify the contrary pradice, are a plain confeilton 
that immerfion, or burying the fubjefts under water, was the 
pradice of the apoftles and primitive church in the ordinance of 
baptifm, and what Chrift commanded to be done. 

The reafons which are alleged why fprinkling may be fubfti- 
tuted for immerfion, are, the want of health, in fome inftances 
where they fuppofe baptifm to be neceffary ; the weaknefs of 
conftitution with refped to fome, and the coldnefs of climate 
with refped to many, and as to all in northern climes in the 
wintry feafon. Here is a filent acknowledgment, that it is not the 
inftiiution, that it is not the permiffion of Chrift, but mere acci- 
dental and local circumftances, which make it lawful to lay by 

* Ten Letters, 



Serm. III.] of Baptifm. 2^ 

the command of Chrift, and to receive in its aead the precepts 
and commandments of men. 

Mr. Bailey fays, in his DiiStionary, that baptifm was perform- 
ed in the eaftern and warmer countries by dipping the perfons 
all over ; but in procefs of time, in the weftem and colder 
countries, fprinkling was fubftituted in the place of dipping. 

Dr. Lathrop in his fermons implicitly confefTes the following 
extra<5ts to be both true and genuine. 

Mr. Baxter, in his Paraphrafe on the Netv- Tejlamenty obferves 
on Matth. iii. 6. " We grant that baptifm then was by wafhing 
the whole body ; and did not the difference of our cold country, 
as to that hot one, teach us to remember, ^I will have mercy 
and not facrifice,' it (hould be fo here." 

The author of the Letters to B'tjhop Hoadlyy in the twenty- third 
page, writes thus : " Mr. Baxter, we have already feen, excufes 
the matter by the coldnefs of our climate. Calvin, the celebra- 
ted reformer of Geneva, obferves in his Expofition of Ads. 
viii. 38, * We fee here what was the baptifmal rite amcng the 
ancients, for they plunged the whole body in the water.' Now 
It is the cuftom for the minifter to fprinkle only the body or 
head, and he too excufes this fprinkling^ but how,. I cannot well 
recolleft, not having his book at hand." 

Blfhop Burnet, though he thus defcribes the primitive bap. 
tifm,." With no other garments but that might ferve to cover 
nature, they at firft laid tliem down, as a man is laid in the 
grave, and then they faid thefe words, I baptize, or wafli, thee 
in the name, &c. Then they raifed them up again, and clean 
garments were put upon them ; from whence came the phrafes 
of being baptized into Chrift's death, of being buried with him 
by baptifm into death, of our being rifen with Chrift, and of our 
putting on the Lord Jefus Chrift ; of putting off the old man, 
and putting on the new," — and though he juftly obferves that 
facraments are pofitive precepts, which are to be meafured only 
by the inlUtution, in which there is not room left for us to carry 
them any faither ; — yet forgetting his own meafure of the infti- 
tution, viz. the party baptized was laid down in the water, as: 
a. man is laid in the grave, he fays, " The danger in cold cli- 
mates may be a very good reafon for changing the form c£ 
baptifm to fprinkling,'** 

I propofe for the prefent to note but one quotation more, and? 
that fliali be in the words of Dr. Wall, as quoted in the Letters, 

* Burcet'8 Jxpofition of the Thirty-nine Article?* 



30 The Mode and SubjeSfs [Serjn. UL 

The Do61or, In giving the reafons why, in Queen Elizabeth's 
reign, the cuftom of dipping was laid afide, obi'erves, " It bein^ 
allowed to weak children co be baptized by aiFufion, many 
found ladies and gentlemen firft, and then, by degrees, the 
common people, would obtain the favour of the prieft to hav€ 
their children pafs for weak children, too tender to endure dip- 
ping in the water."* Now, 

6. It may be eafy for you to gather what is the butward and 
-vifible part of the ordinance of baptifm. 

It is to immerfe proper fubje6ts in water, in the name of the 
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoft. This is the out- 
ward and vifible part of baptifm, the fcriptures being judge ; 
this literal and plain meaning of the command being judge ; the 
pradice of the apoftles being judge ; the practice of the church 
for more than a thoufand years being judge ; and even if we 
appeal to thofe who refufe to pradife thus, they add their tef- 
timony, that it is what was commanded. I'hey pretend not to 
fay that any new command hath been given, or that the old 
one hath ever been changed. What Ihall we fay to thefe 
things ! ! ! 

I conclude by fubmitting a queftion, and a few inferences, 
for your confideration. 

The queftion is, If immerfion be from heaven, and fprinkling 
from men, by what authority do v/e continue the practice ? 

The inferences are — 

1 . We, who call ourfelves Pedobaptifts, are a» a houfe divi- 
ded againft itfelf. To fay the leaft, we appear thus. Our cham- 
pions will look us in the face, and affure us, that the Baptifts 
have plain fcripture for their mode, and yet we have a right to 
choofe on the fcore of convenierice, &c. what mode is pleafmg 
to us. Thus fay Calvin, Hoadly, Owen, and others : whilft 
in their praAice they have been, in this inftance, like the fervant 
who knew, but did not his lord's will. Thefe good men have 
confeiTed rather too much for the credit of their pra<5lice, and 
our comfort while copying it. Many, however, have rifen up, 
in defence of our fathers' pradice and ours. They invent 
many ingenious hypothefes to prove it from heaven, but not 
one affords a folid conclufion which fhows it to be fo. 

2. According to the light which for the piefent appears, 
we cannot but conclude that our definitions of baptifm and to 
baptize are fciiptural, accurate and juft;. If we will do the 
will of God, we muft pradlfe what he commauds, 

♦ Vol, II, p. 30, I Xd. 



Serm. III.] of Bapiifnu '31 

3. It appears that it is not left with us to choofe what mode 
we will pradife in adminiftering or in receiving t3ie ordinance of 
baptifm ; for we find but one mode to it : and we rnuft pradife 
this, or none. We may fpriakle a perfon in the name of the 
Father, &c. and we may wafli the face, or any part of a perfon, 
in the fame facred name ; but it is not poffible to baptize a 
perfon in this way ; for fprinklinp^, or any fmall partial wafhing 
never was, is not now, nor ever will be, what the fcriptures 
mea|i by Chrifti an baptifm. 

4. That a perfon muft be greatly unacquainted With the 
plain, literal, fcripture account of baptifm^ or ex Lreiriely preju- 
diced, not to fay perverfe, to affirm that the Bible fays liothing 
about immerfion, or burying in water for baptizing. For it 
fpeaks of this mode, and of no other, in the application of water 
as a gofpel ordinance. 

The Baptifts have for their mode the broad hafts oi fcripture^ 
antiquity, and the uninterrupted, and fornewhat univerfal prac- 
tice of the church. 

5. It appears that for v/ell-in formed Pedobaptifts to oppofe 
the Baptifts, as to their mode of baptizing, is very great wicked- 
nefs. For the Baptifts have the advantage of plain and exprfefs 
fcripture on their fide, and the learned, critical and caridid 
Pedobaptifts know it. 

Ignorance is the beft and only excufe which we can make for 
ourfelves for any oppofition which we have made againft the 
ancient and primitive mode which the Baptifts have praftifed in 
the adminiftration of the ordinance. Our contention in this 
matter hath not been againft the Baptifts merely, but it hath been 
againft their Lord and ours. 

Dr. Lathrop appears generoufly to grant the truth, that 
immerfion is fcripture baptifm, and only contends that fprink- 
ling be alio allowed ; which every candid mind would readily 
do, were there one text of fcripture to fupport it. 

6. No true Chiittian, if he knew what he did, would ever 
make light of immerfion, which the Lord commands, and the 
Baptifts pra^ife, as the mode of baptizing, or, more ftridly,as 
baptifm itfelf. 



52 The Mode and Suhjeds [Serm. IV. 



SERMON IV. 



MATTHEW xxvHI. 19, 20. 



i 



Go ye, therefore^ and teach all nations t bapt'i%tng them in the name 
of the Fathefy and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghojl ', teach- 
ing them to ohferve all things nuhatfoever I have commanded 
you :■ And, loy I am ivith you ahvay^ even unto the end of the 
ivorld. Amen. 

WHILST difcourring to you upon tliefe words, I have,. 
as I fuppofe, proved to you what is the outward and 
viAble part of baptifm. You have, to appearance, given a 
ferious and foleimi attention, and, I hope, a candid one, to what 
hath been faid. 

All which I afk of you in this matter is, that you in the fpirit 
of meeknefs hear the whole, and then judge and pra<flife in fach 
a manner as you cannot refufe to do, without doing violence to 
your reafoc,and without difobedience to the command of Heaven. 
Some of you may be afraid of difcord ; but whence, I pray 
you,will difcord arife among brethren ? Will a candid, prayerful 
and felf- denying attention to truth caufe this feared difcord ? 
Hath truth a tendency to produce difcord among the faithful 
followers of the Lamb of God ? I know that once, when Chrift 
preached the doctrines of the crofs, multitudes of profeffing 
difciples went back, and followed no more with him. I hope 
it will not be thus with any of you. But, my brethren, how- 
ever it may be with any of you, one thing is clear — I ought, 1 
muft declare to you, fo fad as I profitably can, all thofe truths 
of God which appear neceffary to build you up in found faith 
and holy pra«flice. 

As I have faid before, fo fay I unto you again, that all which 
I afk of you is, to give truth a candid hearing, and yield your 
affent, when fads are plainly proved. 

Nothing fliould, by me, be thought too much to be done, to 
clear away from your minds the darknefs of prejudice, together 
with any erroneous belief and practice which you may have im« 
bibed, in part, by my means. I (hall, therefore, in this difcourfe, 
after having attended to the purport, end or defign of baptifm. 



^&rm. IV.] of Bapufm. S3 

anfwerfome objedllons, which may for the prefent ob(lru(5l the 
force of truth. 

Before we proceed to the particular bufinefs of this difcourfe, 
you will, if you pleafe, attend for a minute to a few queftions, 
and their anfwers. 

1. Is it not a plain cafe, tliat it is my duty to deliver to you 
the whole counfel of God, according to the heft light it may 
pleafe him to afford me ? ... 

2. Is it not equally plain, that your duty is to yield, not to 
me, but to tlie truths which I deliver, an obedient ear ? 

3. Should you, from an uncandid and prejudiced mind, 
refufe to be converted by the truth, will the fault be mine ? 

4. Should I exhibit full evidence, as to the fubjedt on hand, 
and exhibit that evidence clearly too, or Ihould it be that i have 
done this, and yet great difficulties ihould arife, will you be 
juftified (hould you lay the blame to me ? 

5. Should I teach you the truth, and produce all the evi- 
dence which you can afk for, and you ihould, all, like faithful 

-Chriftians, believe it, whejre or whence will arife any difficulty 
among us ? Should any of you retufs to believe, will you charge 
ycur difficulties to my account ? 

6. Are not all of you determined that you will hear can- 
didly, and believe upon evidence ? 

You will pleafe to give a Chriftian and judicious anfwer to 
each of thefe queftions, and let your pra(5lice be conformed 
with the gofpel of our Lord Jefus Chrift. 

Having laid before you the principal part of the fafts and 
evidence, which I intended, as to the vifible and outward pare 
of baptifm, now — 

Lajliy, The purport, end and defign of the Baptlfmal Infti- 
tution may call for fome attention. 

The purport, end or defign of this Chriftian ordinance, 6r 
inftitution, appears to be — 

I. For a dividing line between the kingdom of our Lord, 
and the kingdoms of this world. 

John was Chrift*s forerunner : he was fent before his face to 
turn Uie hearts of the fathers to the children, and the difo- 
bedient to the wifdom of the juft ; to make ready a people pre- 
pared for the Lord ;* and that Chrift ihould be made mani- 
fell to Ifrael, therefore, fays John, am I come baptizing with 
water.f John's miffion comprehended a double purpofe, t<5> 

* Luke I 17. I John i 31. 



34f The Mode and Subjecis [Serm. IV. 

make ready a people, prepared for the Lord, and to tnanifeft 
Sim unto IlVael. The people which he inftrumentally made 
ready, and prepared to receive the Lord, he baptized ; and it 
appears from his lejeding many of the Phanfees and Sadducees 
that he intentionally baptized none other.* 1 he whole dif- 
courfe which he had with them, Mnii. in. 7 to 12, is good evi- 
dence that he admitted none to baptifm but fuch as brought 
forth Tifible fruits of repentance. Such perfons he admitted 
among that people which he was making ready for the Lord. 
This people were, when prepared, to com pofe that kmgdom, 
or the beginning of that kingdom, which ^^^^^l.^f^'-,.^^ ^^T 
ftroyed, and which is an everlafting kingdom, which (hall ftand 
forever ; Daniel ii. 44. and vii. 27. This kingdom Chnft calls 
the kingdom of heaven, and fays, it is not of this world. 

It appears to be this kingdom, which was now at hand, al- 
moft ready to be fet up, of which Chrift fpeaks to N.codemus, 
when he fays, >/m iii. 5- Except a man be bom of w^ater and 
of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom ot Ood. 

AH this does, for fubftance, meet the fentiment of Baptifts 
and Pedobaptifts on this fubjea. Both Aippofe, that none can 
belong to this kingdom without being born of water, or bapti- 
zed. Both fuppofe that men may profe/Tedly. or vifibly, belong 
to tliis kingdom, without being born of the Spirit : but, perhaps, 
neither tlie Baptitts, nor Pedobaptifts, would fay, that any do, 
ftriaiy fpeaking, belong to this kingdom, except they have 
been born of water and of the Spirit. Our Lord faith, Verily, 
verily, except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, ne 
cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven. If a man cannot 
enter into this kingdom but in this way, he cannot belong to 
it in any other. - .. 

Both fides grant, that baptifm, or to be born of water,ji3 the 
only way of admittance into this kingdom. They are not fo 
well agreed as to what it is to be born of water, whether it be to 
be fprinkled, wafhed, or immerfed. Concerning this matter 
you muft judge for yourfelves. 

This being a given point, that the defign of baptifm is, that it 
fhould be for a dividing line between that kingdom, which the 
God of heaven was to fet up in the latter days, and this world, 
I would fuggeft for ycur confideration— Which draws the line 
of feparation moft clearly between this kingdom and all other 
kingdoms on earth ; to enter it by being fprinkled j or by be^ 

* Matt. iii. 7. 



j Scrm. IV.] of Baptifm. 33 

ing vilibly and a<5lually buried in water, and riling as it were 
from the dead, to join this kingdom ? 

I will alfo fugged one thing mere for your confideration : 
Which hath the moft direct and natural tendency to caufe 
Chrift's kingdom to appear to be, as it really is,not of this world ? 
To have alraoft all admitted into it, in infancy, and fo in unbe- 
lief, and all by fprinkling, or by a little water put upon the face, 
and the greater part of them living in open wickednefs, or 
inanifeft unbelief, and unnoticed by the church to which they 
are fuppofed to belong ; or, to have none admitted but profefled 
believers, and thefe admitted in a way which fignificantly fays, 
that they turn their backs upon the world ; yea, that they are 
dead to the world, and are rifea with Chriil ? I only fuggeft 
this for your confideration. I hope to attend to it in its place, 
but not to-day. 

2. The purport, end or defign of baptifm appears to be 
for a manifeftation, that the fubje<5tsofithave forfaken all, yes, 
their own lives, for Chrill's fake and the gofpel. 

How can this be more vifibly manifefted, than by being 
buried with him in baptifm ? How can a man more vifibly for- 
fake all, than he does when buried ? How can any one more 
* manifeftly forfake his own life for another, than by voluntarily 
fubmitting himfelf into the hands of another to be buried 
alive ? 

Is not thi^agreeable to what Chrlft faith, Whofoever he be 
of you that forfaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my 
difciple ? 

3. It appears to be for a reprefentation of our being waflied 
fiom gair fins in the blood of the Lamb. 

John, the revelator, faith, fpeaking of Jefus Chrift, the faithful 
wiinefs, " Unto him that loved us, and waflied us from our fins 
in his own blood." This is a figurative expreffion, (howing 
at once the procuring caufe, the blood of Chrift, and the gracious 
effect, cur fouls purged from dead works to ferve the living 
God. Can any natural fig^ repiefent this more fully, than 
does baptifm, in which our bodies are waflied with pure water ? 

4. I'he purport, end or defign of tliis Chiiftian ordinance 
appears to be for the promotion of piety in individuals, and 
purity in the church. 

What can l?avea ftronger tendency to move the heart of a 
Chriftian to piety and weanednefs from the world, than has the 
inftitution of baptifm ? Seeing at every remembrance of it, he is 
put in mind, how Chriil dXtdforJin, and how every one who 



S6 The Mode and St^hjeSs [Serm. IV. 

hath beh'eved and beeen baptized, has by the ordinance fignally 
died to fin, been buried from the world, and raifed again to new- 
nefs of life. Hath not this ordinance alfo an equally ftrong 
tendency to preferve the parity of the church, fliould it be ad- 
miniftered as we have proved it ought to be, by immerfion only ? 
And (liould another thing be found to be true, that vifible be- 
lievers only fhould be admitted to it, what a world of unbeliev- 
ers would this fliut out of the church ! How differently would 
the profeffed church of Jefus Chrift appear from what it now 
does ! 

If ray information be correiH:, every natural-born fubjedl of 
the crown of England is, according to the laws of their na- 
tional church, to be baptized, and immediately confidered as a 
member of the church. This is, indeed, confident, if all the pa- 
rents have, in any paft period, been profelyted to the Chriftiaa 
religion, and if baptifm have come into the place of circumci- 
fion, and to be adminiftered to children and infants, as that 
was. 

Not only fo, but probably nine-tenths of the inhabitants of 
New. England, if not of our nation, belong to the church, ac- 
cording to the profeiTed belief of the Fedobaptifts. Upon^the 
fame principle I prefume that more than three-fourths of all the 
adults in this and the neighbouring towns belong to the church, 
and have, if the principle be according to the gofpel, a right 
to require admittance to the Lord's Supper, and baptifm for 
their children. Then, upon the fame principle, would their 
children be members of the church, and entitled to all the priv- 
ileges of God's houfe, as they come to years, and nothing (hort 
of grofs immorality could juilify their exclufion. Does this 
look as though Chrift's kingdom were not of this world ? 

5. The purport, end or defig^n of baptifm appears to be 
well defcribed by Dr. Goodwin, in the following words : " The 
eminent thing fig nlfiied and reprefented in baptifm is notfingly 
the blood of Chrift, as it wajles us from our fms, but there is 
a further reprefentation therein of Chrid's death, burial and 
refurre<5lion, in the baptized : and this is not in a bare con- 
formity to Chrift, but is a reprefentation of a communion with 
Chrift in his death and refurrefftion ; therefore it is faid, We 
are buried with him in baptifm, and wherein we are rifen with 
him, &c. And moreover, here it is that the aofwer of a good 
confcience, which is made the inward cffeft of this ordinance, 
1 Peter \\\. 21. is there alfo attributed to Chrift's refiirredlion, as , ,^ 
the thing fignified and reprefented in baptifm ; and as the caufe^^jM 



Serm. IV.] of Bapiifm. 37 

of that anfwer of a good confcience, even baptifm doth now 
fave us, as it is a figure of falvation by Chrift." 

6. The purport, end or defign of the ordinance appears to 
be to point out, or fliadow forth, the forgivenefs or remiffion of 
fms, and the being cleanfed from them. Hence the propriety 
of fcripture expreflions, which are Hke the following : The 
baptifm of repentance for the remiffion of fms, Mark i. 4. 
Arife and be baptized, and v/afti away thy fias, Atts xxii. i6* 
Here it is worthy of the critical reader^s notice, that the word 
tranllated ix}ajh aivayy is apoloufaU which fignifies to wafli clean, 
or to wafh out a (lain, as well as to wafh away. It is alfo 
worthy to be obferved, that the word louo^ whence this is derived, 
is the only word or theme, fave bapi'izo, v/hich, in the New-Tef- 
tament, fignifies to wafn the body. This being well confidered, 
it cannot be doubted but baptifm is a moft fignificant repre- 
fentation of the remiffion of fin, or cleanfing from it. 

Lajlly, rhe purport, end and defign of the ordinance of 
baptifm appears to be, for an open and manifeft declaration 
that thofe who receive it, diO heartily, and of a ready mind, put 
on Chrift, enter into his fervice, receive him to be their Prophet, 
Prieft and King, and covenant to be for him, and for him 
only. Accordingly it is faid, /\s many as were baptized into 
Chrift, have put on Chrift : They have put on his name, his 
felf denying profeffion, hi* fuffering, defpifed, but glorious caufe. 
Is the purport, end and defign of baptifm as hath been now 
ftated ? then the mode is imraerfion ; and thofe who change the 
ordinance from dipping to fprinklingy and apply it to unbelievers, 
pervert the ordinance^ lofe its import, and make it quite another 
thing. This we have, for years, ignorantly done. 

We will now attend to the arguments, which the late Rev. 
John Cleaveland hath left us in fupport oi fprinkUngy as being 
authentic baptifm. This Mr. Cleaveland was, and t believe 
juftly too, efteemed as one of the moft pious and faithful fer- 
vants of Chrift. Whilft I was favoured with a perfonal ac- 
quaintance with him, he ftood very high in my eftimation, for 
his unaffected piety, and fervent fimplicity, as a preacher of 
the everlafting gofpel. I ftill retain the fa.Tie opinion of the 
good rnan. But great and good men are not always wife. 
In any inftance where their wifdom hath failed ihem, we fiiould 
be careful how we follow. The Bereans would not take Paui 
for a guide, widiout firft bringing him to the ftandard of divine 
truth. The Bereans were juftified. Should we treat Mr. C. 
iu the fame way, he could not, and I am iftclined to think, he 
D 



38 The Mode and Subje^s [Serm. IV. 

would not, though he were living, condemn us. I might let 
his works and arguments in fupport of fprinkling, fleep, were 
it not, that feme of you, my people, and perhaps others, may 
by them, in one particular, be k(fpt from beholding Chrift, as in 
an open glaf?. 

liie good mivn*s objeft was, to prove that baptlfm by fprink* 
ling is authentic, or is fcriptural ; or that fprinkling is baptifm. 
I will now lay before you his fuppofed ftrong arguments by 
which hefupports the validity of fprinkling for baptizing. Af- 
ter ftatlng the principles of the Baptifts, as to the ordinance 
now conlidering, his 

ift. Argument is, "Their learned men know that the word 
hapti%o in Luke xi. 38, and hapttfmous in Mark \\\. 2 — 5, are ufed 
to fignify the fime as nipto is, i. e. proper wafhing, or making 
clean by the application of water, in cafes that do not neceffarily 
require dipping as the mode of wafhing." The anfwer to this 
is : That neither the learned men among the Baptifts, nor the 
learned among any other clafs of men, know any fuch thing. 
Befides, baptiflhey in Luke, and hapttfmous^ in Mark^ have refer- 
ence to, and mean, a ceremonial, a religious, or rather, as may- 
be more properly called in thefe inftances, a fuperftitious wafh- 
ing. What is meant by a ceremonial wafhing, you may fee by 
looking into the ceremonial law : Levit. xi. 52, and in NumLxix» 
39, where you will find that this ceremonial wafhing was, to 
put into water, or to bathe one's flefh in water. You hence 
fee that thefe two pafTages, with which Mr* Cleaveland lays the 
foundation of his fupport of fprinkling for baptifm, utterly fail 
him, and come in as auxiliaries to confirm immerfion as the only 
Icripture baptifm. I will not fay that nipto is never ufed to fig- 
^nify ceremonial wafhing, and fo intend the wafliing or putting 
the hands into water, {pugme) with abundance of exaclnefs, as 
Dr. Doddridge expounds it, or up to the elbows, as L'Enfanc 
renders it. But one thing is evident to all who will examine 
the texts, and compare them with the ceremonial wafhings of 
the ceremonial law, in conformity with which the Jewifh do<Elors 
meant to have their traditional ceremonies, that bapii%d and 
haptifmos are not ufed in the fenfe in which nipPd generally is. In 
every point of view, Mr. Cleaveland*s texts utterly fail him, and 
go todeftroy the cuftomor tradition he brought them to fupport. 
Befides, I do not find that baptizo is ufed, in any place, for 
waihing the hands, or for wafhing or dipping a part of the 
body, or any other thing. Mr. Cleaveland's 

2d, Argtyment is built upon Hdrews ix. 10. where the 



Serm. IV.] of Baptifnu 39 

Apoftle rpeaks of ( diaphoro'is hapttfmois ) divers wafhings. Here, 
where the Apoftle is fpeaking of divers ceremonial wafhings, or 
bathings, Mr. Cleaveland, without the leaft poffihle evidence, 
concludes the Apoftle means divers fprinklings. 

The fame anfwer which was given to the firft argument be- 
longs to this, as Mr. Cleaveland has produced no evidence, that 
(hapiifmois) wafhings, or bathings, means fprinklings, fave that 
in the 1 3th and 2 1 ft verfes. The Apoftle makes ufe of the word 
fprinkle, when fpeaking of the application of blood, and fpeak- 
ing of the unclean ; he fays, they are ranil%eJ, and adds, al- 
moft all things are by the law purged, rather i%ed^ not bapti%ed, 
with blood. It is not a little furprifmg tliat a man of Mr. Clcave- 
land*s good fenfe (hould fay, and that Dr. Lathrop, and other 
men of erudition, fhould follow him, in faying, thefe different 
fprinklings, in the 13th and z ift verfes, refer to haptifrmis, when, 
had they looked three words farther, they would have found 
them to be, kai d'lkaiomaft farkos^ the liberal Englifh of which 
is, " The ordinances of God concerning the ceremonial rites of 
bloody facrifices !" Had they looked into their Greek tefta- 
raents, they might, with eafe, have feen that their argument 
would not bear examination. Surely, had thefe gentlemen had 
the right of the queftlon, they never would have compelled the 
Apoftle to explain by the fprinkling of blood, what he meant by 
bathings or wafhings with water. Perhaps a more forced expo- 
fition of fcripture is feldom heard. Befides, the Apoftle told 
them, by placing what is tranilclttd, carnal ordinances, between 
divers wafhings in the loth, and fprinklings in the 13th and 
2ift verfes, that he intended no fuch thing as they fuppofed. 
U I mlftake not, Mr. C.'s 

3d. Argument is an attempt to prove that lapto and laptizd 
are ufed to fignify fomething more than to dip, put into water, 
&c. When the good man brought forward his argument, he 
forgot — &c. — which belongs to his quotation from Dr. Gale, 
and which incltides imme:fion and overwhelming, and which 
comprifes the whole which Mr. C. has proved that baptizo fig- 
nlfies. But, waving, his forgetfulnefs, we will attend to what 
he fays. All which he appears to do here is, to fhow that 
hapto-^x bapti%d are ufed to wafh, dip and wet with fprink- 
ling the dew from heaven, and to overwhehn. That is, bi^pio 
fignifies to dip, put into water, wet with the dew of heaven, &c. 
and bapiizo fignifies to dip, put into water and overwhelm. 
What is the confequence ? According to Mi. C. it is this : Be- 
caufe bapto is fometimes ufed to fignify one's being wet with the 



40 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. IV. 

diftilling dew of heaven, &c. therefore haptlzd fignifies the fame 
thing : Becaufe lapio fignifies in one place to walh without 
dipping, therefore baptt%o fignifies to wafn without dipping ; 
and becaule bapto is foiinetimes ufed to fignify to colour, or ftain, 
by afpcriion, or the like, therefore baptizo is ufed in the fame 
fenfe ; therefore fprinkling is authentic baptifm. What evidence, 
I pray yoi', my hearers, is there in all this ? Yes, what Ihow or 
appearance of evidence is there in all this ? Would ten thoufand 
fuch arguments afford you the leaft convidion, or gain your 
affent, where you had a cent to lofe ? 

ilvery perfon of fjnfe, who is acquainted with the Greek, 
would, generally fpeaking, allow Mr. C.'s premifes, that baptu, 
in different places, fignifies the application of water in different 
ways ; and that boptizd fometimes fignifies overwhelming. But 
no perfon, who underftands the matter, will ^llow his -conclu- 
fion, for it hath no connexion with the premifes. 

Hi» argument, in plain Englifh, is tliis : The verb to wet, 
fometimes fignifies to fprinkle, as in a heavy dew we fay it 
fprinkles, or wets ; the verb to overwhelm, fometimes fignifies 
to cover all over with water, as is the beach, by the flowing of 
the tide. Of confequence, to overwhelm is to fprinkle ; there- 
fore to fprinkle is authentic overwhelming, or baptifm. The 
fallacy of this argument is eafily detetSled, and with the fame 
eafe may any one, who knows the different fignifications of bapto 
and bapiizof uncover the fallacy and complete inconclufivenefs 
of Mr. C.'s .argument. 

The plain truth is, he hath done his fide a difTervicc ; for by 
fearching he hath found, and implicitly acknowledges, though 
net intentionally, and (I fuppofej without knowing it, that no 
inftarxe can be found where baplizo fignifieth the application of 
water by fprinkling, or any other way, w^hich docs not imply 
overwhelming, or wafhing, that is, a ceremonial wafhing, 
which is bathing, or putting into water. But— 

4. There is another argument upon which Mr. Cleaveland 
chiefly dwells, and upon which he appears greatly to reft the 
defence of his whole caufe. It is his (Irong hold againft immer- 
fion, and for fprinkling ; and it is this : Baptifm with water, or 
baptifm as a Chriftian ordinance, is to fignify Chrifl's baptizing 
with the Holy Ghoft. 1 have no where found that he hath 
proved that this is the great and principal thing which baptifm 
fignifies ; nor do 1 by any means obtain eonviftion that the 
mode of baptizing is to be determined, with certainty, from 
this particular thing, even fhould it be granted that one impor» 



Serm. IV.] of Baptifnu ^ 41 

tant defign of baptifm is to fignify Chrift's baptizing with the 
Holy Ghoft. But, as Mr. C. feems to depend upon the ftrength 
of this argument more than he does upon the ftrength of any 
other, we will grant for the prefent, tlrat baptifm with water 
was appointed particularly, if not mainly, to fet forth the mode 
in which Chrift baptizeth with the Holy Ghoft. 

Now tlie gieat queftion is, In what manner or mode, by 
fprinkling or overwhelming, did Chrift Jefus baptize with the 
Holy Ghoft ? Mr. C. in his treatife, replies abundantly. By 
fprinkling, certainly. We will put this fubje(ft to the teft, by 
inftancing the moft remarkable feafon which ever was, in which 
Chrift, m a moft remarkable, public and aftonilhing degree was 
bapti^zing with the Holy Ghoft. I prefume were Mr. C. now 
alive, he could not, with any face of propriety, objeft agalnft 
taking a fample for the whole, the moft remarkable inftance 
which ever hath been, and perhaps which ever will be exhib- 
ited of Chrift's baptizing with the Holy Ghoft. I am willing 
tofubmit the ftrong argument of Mr. C. to this great fample of 
Chrift's baptizing with tlie Holy Ghoft. Are not all you, my 
hearers, willing to leave the weight of his argument to fuch a 
decifion ? I am perfuaded you all fay, Yes. 

We will then bring his argument to the propofed teft. 

Tlie inftance which we will take, (for fuiely it is the mod 
aftoniftiing one,) is that v/hich Chrift foretold, as related, A<51& 
i. 5. " Jofci truly baptized with water, but ye fliall be baptize4 
with the Holy Ghoft, not many days hence." The accomplilh- 
roent of thi<i prediction and promife we have related in the four 
firft verfes of the next chapter. It is thus : W^hen the day of 
Pentecoft was fully come, they were all with one accord in one 
place. And fuddenly there was a found from heaven, as of a. 
rufhing, mighty wind, and it filled all the houfe where they 
Were fitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues^, 
like as of fire, and it fat upon each of them. And they were all 
filled with die Holy Ghoft. 

Here was truly 2, wonderful inftance of Chrlft.*s baptizing 
with the Holy Ghoft. 

Here, i^ All the houfe was filled with the found, wind or 
Spirit from heaven. 2. Cloven tongues, like as of fire, and it 
fat upon each of them. 3. They were all filled with tlie 
Holy Ghoft. • 

We here fee that they were all overwhelmed ; for all the 
houfe, where they were fitting, was filled ; and not oaly were. 
they all overwhelmed, but tliey were alfo filkd, 
D ^ 



42 The Mode and Subje^s [Serm. iV. 

It is left with you to determine, what becomes of Mr. C.'s 
argument, upon which he lays fo much ftrefs, and of which he 
fpeaks with fo much confidence, and not unfrequently with an 
air of triumph. Is there a word about fprinkling in any part 
of it ? or is there any thing which looks like it ? Does it not 
look confiderably like immeifion, or overwhelming ? At leaft, 
does it not favour immerfion, or overwhelming, as much as it 
does fprinkling ? If fo, then it proves nothing for fprinkling. 
It is left with you to determine which fide it favours. 

It is poffible, however, that fome of you may fnppofe, that 
Mr. C. might intend that bapLifm, if it may be fo called, which 
the Holy Ghoft minifters, when it creates the foul anew. To 
this fuppofition, I will juft obferve, *' The wind bloweth (faith 
Chiift) where itlifteth, and thou heareft the found thereof, but 
canft not tell whence it cometh or whither it goeth ; fo is every 
one that is born of the Spirit" Would it not be extreme folly 
to fuppofe that water baptifm reprefents the operations of the 
Spirit, when none can know whence it cometh, or whither it 
goeth ? It may rcprefent the effect of the Spirit's operations ; 
and it is called, a being born, not fprinkled, of the Spirit. 

5. In reading Mr. C.'s defence of fprinkling, as being au- 
thentic baptifm, I noticed but one more diftind argument, and 
it is this : 

'* Nipt a, lapti^Ot louo, hrecho. pluno, or apopJuno^ all fignify to 
waih." The conclufion which he draws from this is, in fhort, 
the fallowing : To baptize is not to immerfe, but to fprinkie. 
I fee no connexion between his premifs and conclufion- Befides, 
Mr. C. telh us, page 80, that the Jews, by adhering to the tra- 
dition of the elders, obferved the waftiing of hands, and divers 
other things, as a religious ceremony. Now, if all the words, 
which Mr. C. mentions, fignify to walh, and yet fome of them 
fignify common wafhing, and another, and that haptt'z>d, fignifies. 
cere;nonial waHiing, and that be to put into water, as is ti:e 
cafe, what does his argument prove ?, It proves juft nothing to 
his point. Had he proved, whcit he bath not even attempted, 
that they all fignify the fame kind of wafhing, and that the 
wafhing figaified was not immerfion, but fprinkling only, then 
his conclufion would have followed, that fprinkling is bap- 
tifm. 

if !he above arguments will not fupport Mr. Gleaveland's 
theory, it rnuft: all come down ; for ihey are the fuhflance, if 
not all ihe arguments, which he hath adduced, and I prefume 
better cannot be found. 



Serm. IV.] of Baptifm. 43 

I thou/»ht to have taken Dr. Lathrop's arguments upon the 
fame fubjeft, into confideration ^ but upon re-examining them 
I find there is no material diflimilarity between his and Mr. 
C.*s ; they therefore both ftand or fall together. A word or two 
may be here added. 

Dr. Lathrop aflures us that Cyprian, who wrote within about 
one hundred and fifty years of the apoftles, fpeaking of fprinkr 
Kng, fays, *' In the facrament of falvation (that is, baptifm) 
when neceffity compels^ the fhorteft ways of tranfading divine 
matters do, by God's grace, confer the whole benefit." The 
Do(5lor adds, ** The 2iXiC\tT\is praBifed immerjion"'^' 

By this quotation of the Dodor's from Cyprian, and confeffion 
of his own, being put together, it appears at once that all his 
preceding arguments are erroneous ; for Cyprian does not 
intimate that fprinkling was from heaven, but fays it was from 
necefTity. Befides, his calling baptifm the facrament of falva- 
tion, fliows us the error, whence the neceffity of fprinkling came, 
namely, a belief that the ordinance of baptifm was neceflary to 
falvation. This being the cafe, and it alfo being true, as the 
Dodtor acknowedges, that the ancients prm^ifed immerfion,. 
fave when neceffity compelled, a« they errorteouHy fuppofed, 
the confequence is fairly this,^ that immerfion is from heaven, 
the ancients being judges ; and that fprinkling is from men, from 
neceffity, or ratlier from error. 

I thought to have added no more upon the Dofflor's mode of 
Chriftian baptifm. However, one argument ought to be taken 
out of his hands, left it mifguide fome of his readers. He tells 
us, that hapti%d, in Mark vii. and Luke xi. is ufed to fignify 
the application of water to the hands. The only anfwer needed 
is. It is not thus faid, in Mark, or Luke, or in any other part of 
the Bible^ When tlie Dodlor (hall re-examine the palTages, 
he will probably fee the miftake. 

Will gentlemen, and Chriftians too, forever contend againft 
immerfion^ the inftitution of heaven, and for Jprinklwjy vrhich hath 
nothing but error BXidlconvemeticeioT its fupport ! 

* Pages a4, ^5- 



44 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. V. 



SERMON V. 



MATTHEW xxvili. 19, 20. 

Go ye, therefore, atid teach all nations , baptising them in the name 
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghofl ; teaching 
them to obferve all things ivhatfoever I have commanded you : 
And, loy I am with you alway, even unto the end of the 
(World. Amen* 

I HAVE confidence in you, brethren, that ye will keep the 
ordinances, as I fliall deliver them to you, and prove them 
to be from the word of the Lord. 

One thing I would ftill know of you, my brethren, whether 
you, like tlie more noble Bereans, will receive the word with 
readinefs, fearching the fcriptures daily, that you may know the 
truth of what you hear. 

You will bear in mind, that whofoever loveth father or 
mother, houfe or lands, wife or children, more than Chrift, is 
not worthy of him. If, through afFedion for any of thefe, you 
fhould refufe to obey Chrift, it will be too evident that you love 
them more than you do him, and fo are not worthy of him. 

Should you love any erroneous belief and pradice more than 
you do tlie truths of Chrift, you will, fo far as you manifeft it, 
prove that you are not worthy of him. 

Should you defpife me for delivering and vindicating the 
truths of Chrift to you, you will at the fame time defpife him. 
You will therefore give good heed to what you fay,, and to what 
you do in this matter ; for if it be of God, it will ftand, and 
none can overthrow it. It is hoped none of you will be found 
fighting againft God. 

This difcourfe may contain a review of what we have pafTed 
over, together with fome application. In my firft difcourfe to 
you on the fubje<5l, which we have ftill before us, the following 
are the principal thmgs to which we attended. 

I. 1 propofed a number of plain truths, confidered to be as 
firft principles, for your attention. 

I. Eaptifm is a pofitive inftitution, about which we can 
know nothing, as to its being a Chriftian ordinance, but from 
what Chrift, and thofe infpired by his Spirit, have taught us. 

a. All which we are required to believe and pra^i/e, with 



Serm. V.] of Baptifnu 45 

Tefpe(S ^ the Chrlftian ordinance of baptifm, is declared to us 
by Jefus Chrirt, and by his forerunner and apoftles. 

3. When Jefus Chrift firft inftituted the ordinance of bap- 
tifen, he no doubt delivered his mind fo clearly and fully upon 
^^ fubjea:, that his difciples and immediate followers under- 
ftood and pradifed as he would have them. 

4. Every thing which hath, by the precepts and command- 
ments of men, been added fince, is afide from the ordinance? 
and makes no part of it. 

5. No man» nor body of men, hath any more authority to 
add to or diminifli from this ordinance, than they have to infti- 
uite a new one and call it Chrift'n. 

6. Whenever, and wherever, the ordinance of baptifm is fo 
-changed as to lofe the intent of the inftitution, ±en and there 
the ordinance is loft, and becomes no Chriilian ordinance at all. 

II. I defined for your information a number (£ words 
whicli appertain to the ordinance of baiptifm. 

We found all thefe to be juft as we might expecjl to have 
found them, provided immerfAn be baptifm, or the mode in 
which it is adminiftered. 

Baptiflerton, a place in which to wafii the body. Bapttfm, im- 
mcrfion, or dipping one all over in water. Bapti%o fignifies to 
dip, or wajfh, the body all over in water. Louo (a word feveral 
times ufed in reference to, or fignifying the fame, as baptifm) 
is, to \Tafh, to rinfe, to bathe, &c. Then, 

III. I fet before you all the texts in the New-Teftament 
which relate either to the baptifm of John, or to that of our 
Lord Jefus Chrift. In the n^t place, I propofed for your 
meditation the paffages of fcripture where walhing is mention- 
ed, and the Greek words which are ufed. I then called your 
attention tc thofe paffagesrin which fprinkling is mentioned, 
and to the Greek words which are made ufe of. Laftly, I read 
to you thofe fcriptures where to dip is mentioned, and aifo the 
Greek words which are rendered to dip. 

In not one of the places, where the ordinance of baptifm is 
brought to view do we find one word about fprinkling, or auy 
thing which looks like it. In every place where to dip is men- 
tioned, we find a near relation to baptifm j every word which 
is ufed, coming from the fame root or theme, from which 
bapt'i%Q comes. 

As 10 the v/ord wajhy we find no relation between the words 
which fignify to wafti, and thofe which fignify to baptize, fave 
m thofe few inftanc€s where the meaning is to wafti the body. 



46 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. V. 

or put into water, or wafli a thing all over. When we come 
to the Greek words which fignlfy to.fprlnkle, we find no fim- 
ilarity, or likenefs, between them and the word to baptize. 

In all the places where baptizing is mentioned, ivot a word is 
ufed which looks like fprinkling ; where fprinkling is mention- 
ed, there is not a word ufed which appears like baptifm. 

In my next difcouife, I produced my evidence, that my 
definitions of baptifm and to baptize were accurate and juft. 1 
dwelt largely upon this evidence, for the merit of the whole 
fabje<^ depends greatly, if not entirely, upon the determinate 
meaning of the words, which our Lord ufed in the inftitution 
of the ordinance, and when fpeaking of it. When we know 
the determinate fignificatron of his words, we know what he 
fays, and what we ougl>c to underftand by tbe words which he 
ufes. The evidence which I produced, was, in fliort, the fol- 
lowing: 

1. The Greek Lexicon, Butterworth's Concordance, Bai- 
ley's and Entick's Dictionaries, bear their united teftimony, 
that the plain, literal, and common, if not univerfdl, lignifica- 
tion of the words baptifm and to hapttzey is immerfion and to 
immerfe, bury in water, to dip, or to plunge a perfon all over 
in water. Here are four learned and pofitive witnefles to the 
fame thing. Indeed, they give no other fignification, fave it 
be to walh, which we have feen intends a ceremonial wafliing, 
which is to put into water, or to bathe. 

2. I repeated fome of the attendant or circumflantial fa(5ls, 
which have relation to the ordinance of baptifm. John bap- 
tized IN the river Jordan. He was baptizing in Enon near 
to Salim, becaufe there ^"is much ivater there. The word 
hapttjlery fignifies a place in which to wafli the body all over. 
Baptifm fignifies to dip, to plunge, immerfe,^. c.^ to wafh the 
body all over in water. Bapti%er fignifies one which dips, 
plunges, or wafhes the body all over in water. To baptize fig- 
nifies to immerfe, plunge under water, or under any other 
liquid thing, or to dip, or to put into water. To be baptized 
is to be plunged, immerfed, or wafhed all over in water. 

Thefe things being true, is it not eafy to determine what the 
ordinance of bijptifm fignifies ? 

3. The words baptifmos and bapti%d have two, and only two, 
tranflations in the Ne v- reftament. Thefe two are baptifm and 
nvajllng. Where their meaning is wafhing, or where they are 
thus tranflated, it is a ceremonial wafhing, which is to put 
into water, or bathe the fleHi in water, as you may fee, Levit, xit 



Serm. V.] of Baptijnu 47 

32. Numh» xlx. 19. When they are tranflated baptifm^ or to 
bapti%ey the thing intended is the baptifm of water, of fire, of 
fufFerings, or oi the Holy Ghoft. 

4. I brought forward feveral noted witne/Tes, to bear their 
united teftimony, that I had given a juft definition of the word 
hapt'izo : thefe were, John Calvin, Zanchius, and Dr. Owen. 

In the next place I mentioned to you that Paul repeatedly 
ufes the word /o«o, where he means the fame things as where 
he ufes the word hapti'zo ; that he ufes thefe words as fignifying 
the fame thing. Whereas, loud fignifies to wafh and to bathe 
the body in water, and confeqnently hapti%o means the fame. 

Lajlly, I brought forward Paul's expofition of the word 
baptifm^ and Ihowed you, that he expounds it, as being buried 
with Chrift in baptifm, or immerfion. 

In my difcourfe, which I next preached to you, I produced 
evidence, that the apoftles and primitive Chriftians, not only 
under ftood the matter as I have defcribed it, but praftlfed 
accordingly. 

In fupport cf the apoflle's pradice, I obferved, that the word 
louoj of determinate fignification, which they ufed to fignify 
their praftice, or what was done by them in baptifm, deter- 
mines or fixes their pra<5lice to be immerfion. I fartl^er obferv- 
ed, that they were commanded to pra<5tife baptifm, or to bap« 
tize, as I have defcribed it ; and that the fcriptures teftify, 
that they thus did ; and alfo that the apoftles fay, the mode 
of baptizing in their day was, by burying the fubjefts in 
baptifm. 

For witneffes that the primitive church pradlifed immerfion, 
we have Mofheim, Bailey, Calvin, Baxter, and many others, 
all agreeing in this one point, that the mode of baptizing, or 
baptifm itfelf, among the arcients, was immerfion. We have 
alfo evidence that the church thus pra<Sifed, for thirteen 
hundred years, feme extreme cafes excepted. Moreover we 
have evidence that all the church, in Europe, in Aiia, and in 
Africa, fave that part of it, which is now, or hath been, under 
the bewildering power of the popes, do now, and ever have, 
praftifed immeifion. 

Befides all this, the very reafons which the Pedobaptifts 
affign, why they have laid afide immerfion, ftiow that fprink- 
iing is not commanded by the Lord, but is taught by the 
precepts of men. 

You fee we have an ocean of witneffes and evidence againft 
us; and all, or nighly fo, from our own denomination of 



48 The Mode and Subjects [Serm. V. 

Cbriftians. What a world of evidence inight we reafonably 
exped that the Baptifts would be able to bring for themselves, 
and again ft us and our pra(5tice, would we hear them, when 
our own fide bring fo much agalnft their own pradice and for 
the Baptifts ! Befides, this evidence appears to ftand in its 
full force againft us, there being no oppofite evidence to weaken 
its force. Indeed we are, in this matter, much like criminals, 
who plead, at leaft the leaders of them, guilty to the whole 
indi<5tment. However, fome have made a full plea cf, not guihy 
but in part. At the fame time, numbers of them, in their 
plea, have convided themfelves of being guilty throughout. 

In the laft difcourfe, after holding to your view the purport, 
end and defign of baptifm, 1 examined one of their pleas of, 
not guilty. But what evidence did the the good man give oF 
his innocence ? Can the largeft ftretch of charity allow more 
than this, hekneiv not ivhat he did? Was truth ever brought to 
fuch flraits as to require to be Supported by fuch arguments ? 

APPLICATION. 

FROM a review of the whole fubje^fl, the following appear 
to flow as neceifary confequences. 

I. Whether we allow immerfioato be the fcripture mode 
cf baptifm, and the only one which it requires, or not ; one 
thing is clear, that we have as much evidence of its being fo, 
as we could have, on fuppofition that it were. 

The fcriptures declare, in various ways, that this is the mode, 
and mention no other. The fcriptures expound themfelves 
to mean immerfion, or burying. 

We find not a fmgle trace, in all the fcriptures, where the 
ordinance is fpoken of, of any thing ftiort of immerfion being 
mentioned. 

Good men, who are (kilful in the true import of words, 
have agreed, that the plain, literal and accurate meaning of 
the word, to baptize, is to immerfe or bury in water, &c. Nor 
liave any been able to fiiow that in any part of God's word it 
hath any oppofite meaning or application. 

The church of Jems Chrift have, in all ages, underftood the 
matter of baptifm as I have explained it. We muft, however, 
except for tlie laft three or five hundred years, many of thofe 
branches of the church, which have been, or are now, under 
the jurifdidion of ihe church of Rome. The purport, end and 
defign of baptifm aifo intimate to us, that this is the xxiauner 
of baptizing. 



Serm. V.] of Baptifnu 49 

Indeed, if there be any words in the Greek language Jby • 
which the Lord of the Baptifmal Inftitution could have told us 
what he intended, the words ufed do this. For there are no 
two words in the language, or, at leaft, none which have come 
to our knowledge, which fo literally, fo uniformly, and fo exprefs* 
ly, fignify to immerfe, or wafli, or bathe the body in water, as 
do the words haptlzo and louo. Hence, if immerfion be baptifm, 
the Lord, if I may fo fay, could not have told us of it in the New 
Teftament, if ths words, chofen by the Holy Ghoft, do not 
afford this information. If baptifm be immerfion, then the 
two moft fuitable words have been chofen to exprefs it ; but 
if fprinkling be baptifm, two words which were farther from the 
point could not have been found. We find no inftance, in the 
Bible, where they are thus ufed. In Ihoit, no two words, 
which mention the application of water in any way, are farther 
from the idea of fprinkling, than are thofe two which are ufed 
when baptifm is intended. It therefore appears, that whilft we 
have ufed fpi inkling for baptifm, we have departed from the 
plain and primitive import of the words ufed, as far as we 
could without a complete omiffion of water. None can be at .a 
farther remove fiom the inftituted, fcripture baptifm, than 
we have been, without denying it in whole. 

2. Error is very infiuuaiing and deceiving. Surely it 
hath proved thus in the fubject of fprinkling. 

Cyprian, who wrote witliin about a huiidred and fifty years 
of the apoftles, fpeaking of fprinkling, fays, as quoted by Dr. 
Lathrop, "In the facrament of fahauGUy (i. e. baptifm) when 
necejjity compels^ the fliorteft ways of tranfa^^ing divine matters, 
do, by God's grace, confer the whole benefit.*' Here we fee 
the origin of fprinkling for baptifm. 

It was an early error in the church, that baptifm was 
neceffary to falvation. Hence, when it was judged, that life 
would be endangered by imm.erfion, the perfon mull either 
lofe his life by baptifm, or iofe his foul for want of being bap- 
tized, or fome other mode muft be invented. Or, if the fick 
perfon was nighly dying, he muft be baptized without immer- 
fion, or probably lofe his foul, before he could be conveyed 
where the ordinance might be adminiftered. Under thefe 
circumftances, man*s fruitful invention devifed fprinkling as a 
fubflitute for baptifm. Here is the origin pf fprinkling, as the 
ancients have told us. 

In procefs of time, found ladies and gentlewomen wifhed to 
iiave ^tinkling fubftituted for baptifm ia their behalf; afier- 

E 



50 The Mode and Suhjeds [Serm. V. 

wards others, till at laft, It became a general cuftom in many 
of the European nations. In the mean time, the Baptifts, and 
many others, objeded againft the pradice, as being contrary 
from the command of Chrift. Hence arofe the neceffity of 
defending it, or elfe having it confidered as a departure from 
the faith. Matters being thus, the invention of many was in 
full exercife to defend fprinkling, as being of divine origin. A 
number of ceremonial rites of the Levitical law were prefled 
into this fervice ; feveral paff^ges of the New- Tellament were 
wrefted from their natural meaning to a forced interpretation ; 
and out of the motley mixture were formed what were ityled 
arguments ; but fuch arguments can ftand no longer than while 
prejudice lives to fupport them. 

However, the moft difagreeable part is, a good number of 
very pious and learned men have been carried away in this 
whirlpool of deception. Their being deceived has deceived 
others ; and we are, or have been, among the deceived. 

3. Sprinkling is not from heaven, but of men. This too, 
if I miftake not, by the fully and fairly implied conceflion of 
thofe, who have written in its de/ence. 

If from heaven, why, in the firft place, ufe it only when 
neceffity compelled ! as was iuppofed to fave fouls from hell ? 
If from heaven, why, afterwards, ufe it only in cafes of lefs 
urgent neceffity \ If from heaven, why bring in the coldnefs of 
the country as an excufe for ufmg it ? If from heaven, why not 
mentioned in the inftitutionof the ordinance, or in fome paifage 
where mention is made of baptifm, or in fome other place in 
all the writings of the Evangel ifts and Apoftles ? If from heaven, 
why rot intimated as being fo, by thofe who firft introduced 
it ? If fprinkling be from heaven, why io many uiconclufi've 
arguments in its fupport ? Is the word of God deficient in this 
particular, and haih it revealed what cannot be fupported by 
it ? If^rom heaven, why not commanded, enjoined, required, 
or fo much as once hinted, as being a mode of a gofpel ordi- 
nance, in any part of that revelation which we have received 
from heaven \ 

4. Another confequenca is. That the fcripture mode of 
baptifm is immerfion, and for aught we know, the only mode, 
and necefTary to the adminiftration of the ordinance. 

This is the plain, literal, fcripture fenfe of baptifm ; there- 
fore this is the plain, literal, fcripture mode. The fcriptures 
mention no other mode ; therefore this may be, and is, for 
anght appears, th^ only fcripture mode. 



Serm. V.] of Baptifm. &l 

- 5. From what we have gone over, one thing appears cer- 
' tain : That Chrift never commanded any of his followers ta 
adminifter any gofpel ordinance by fpr inkling, and, at the fame 
time, to fay, / baptize. For to do thus, would be to command 
them to do one things and to fay that they did another. 

Tofprink/e is to rantize, which hath no vifible connexion wich 
baptifm. To fay, Chrift commanded his difciples to rantize, 
and, at the fame time, to fay. We baptize, is what no Chriftian 
would, knowingly, be willing to fay. This would, if I raiftak^e 
not, be making Chrift the minifter of fin. But what I have 
long, implicitly, though i^norantly, done, others may ftill do. 

6. Another confequence is, cuftom hath great iailaence 
Upon the human mind. It furely hath upon us. For, even 
after we have full evidence that fprinkling, for baptifm, is not 
from heaven, but was the offspring of error, and foflered by the 
dark ages of Paplftical ufurpation, we are hardly perfuaded to 
renounce it. But, my brethren, my expe<5tatioh is^ that after 
you have fearched your Bibles through and through, and find 
nothing of it there, you will give it up. 

Should the Lord inquire of us, why we fubftitute fprinkling 
for baptizing, and fay unto us. Whence is this fubllitution, from 
heaven, or of men ? Would there not be great reafonings 
among us what anfwer to return I Should we fay. From 
heaven ; he might reply, How do you prove it ? Should we 
fay, Of men, then might he afk. Why do you pradife it ? 

7 - Another confequence is, we have the fame kind of evi- 
dence, and perhaps more of it, that baptifm is to be adminif- 
tered by immerfion, or dipping, or putting into water, than v/e 
have to fupport any other gofpel precept, or pra<5lice. The 
evidence which we have, in eidier cafe, is the (ignification of 
the words which are ufed to point out the thing to be believed, 
or pra<5lifed. 

Were it not for the Influence of habit, or cuftom, you would 
as readily and naturally conclude, from the very words ufed, 
that immerfion, or dipping, or wafhing the body in water, was 
the meaning of baptifm, as that a religious eating of bread, 
and drinking of wine, in commemoration of our dying Lord, 
was the way to obferve the Lord's fupper. 

8. We appear to be brought to this dilemma : We muft 
either embrace the tradition of the elders, for the rule of one 
part of our prai^ice ; or we muft no more fprinkle and call 
it baptifm. 

9. Another confequence Is, Thofe, who firft introduced 



-52 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. V. 

fprlnkllng far baptizing, had no more right fo to do, than thej 
had to inftimte a new rite, or ordinance, and call it Chrift's. 

What authority have we to follow their erroneous and hurt- 
ful pradice ? 

I o. We have another confequence V^orthy of confixieraftiOn, 
and it is this : The Chriftian ordinance of baptifm is a mod fol- 
emn and fignificant ordinance, and of very high importance. 

I fpeak not of the vifible, or aflual adminiftration of it, in 
particular ; for I never faw it adminiftered, as Chrift liPtH 
delivered it to his people : But I refer to the purport, end and 
defign of it. It is, among many other things, the great divi- 
ding line, which Heaven hath appointed to be drawn between 
the vifible kingdom of Immanuel, and the men of this world. 
Doubtlefs there are a large number who belong to Ghrifl's 
jjivifible kingdom, who arc not, {lri(511y fpeaking, or regularly, 
in his kingdom vifibiy, having not fubmitted to this ordinance, 
which is the great and important line of diftin^Ion. 

II. It appears that we are, truly, in a trying ftate. We 
muft depart, i^i one inftance, from a long habit, or continue to db 
as we have done, and yet not be able to vindicate, by the fcrip- 
tures of truth, our own condu(5t. 

LajVy. We come, at length, to the anfwer of this old and 
difficult and perplexing queftion : Where, and when, did the 
religious fed: called Baptiils, arife ? The anfwer is, plainly, 
this : They arofe in Judea, at the time when John carhe, 
preaching in the wildernefs the baptifm of repentance. I men- 
sion this confequence with confiderable afTurance, becaufe the 
New-Teftament abundantly favours it, and no man is able to 
contradi(fl me. Should any attempt it, he will fail for want 
of evidence. I fhbuld, not long fmce, have been gratified, could 
I have fcund their origin any where in the dark ages of Popery, 
or at the commencement of the reformation, among the famous 
enihufiafts of Germany, Holland, Switzerland, or Weftphalia. 
But, after having long purfued the perplexing refearch, I 
found their origin, where I leaft of all expedled it, in Enon and 
Jordan. 

A few queftions are now to clofe the prefent fubjed. 

1. Is not immerlion the fcripture baptifm ? 

2. Is fprinkling a mode of baptizing warranted by fcrip- 
ture ? If fo, where ? 

3. Are Old'Teftament rites to explain New-Teftament 
ordinances ? Is Mofes to corred: what Chrift hath left incom^ 
plete ? Is it fo ? 



Serm. V.] of Bapti/m. 53 

4. Will Chrift approve of that practice of men, which To 
changes his pofitive inftirution, as to lofe, greatly to lofe, the 
purport, end and defign of it ? 

5. Was it ever right, and is it now, for men to change 
^. what Chrift hath commanded to be in perpetual obfirvation f 
* Did the fuppofed extreme cafet juftify this change at finl, and 

will trifling inconveniences juilify us now ? 

6. Will it be wife and fafe for us continually to forfake the 
commandment of ChriH for the precepts of men ? 

7. Do you, my brethren, or can )0u, blame me for wiih- 
ing you to keep the ordinances of Chrift as he hath delivered 
them to the faints ? 

8. Should I have manifefted myfelf your friend, or Chrift*S5 
if, after having found fuch a precious, new and old tnafure in 
his word, as is the Chriftian ordinance of bapiilm, I had not 
ventured my life, or in other words, my reputation, my 
eafe, my property, and my every worldly confideration, to 
bring it forth to your view and acceptance, that you might 
more fully walk in all the ftatutcs and ordinances of the Lord 
blamelefs ? 

One requeft, my brethren, I pray you to grant me, and it is 
ibis ; Search the fcriptures devoutly, and follow me fo far as. 
I follow Jefus Chrift, your Lord and mine. 



SERMON VI. 

MATTHEW xiviiL 19, 20. 

' jO yCf therefore^ and teach all nations^ baptizing them in the namc^ 
of the Father <i and of the Sony and of the Holy Ghofl ; teaching 
them to ohf^rve all things nvhatfoever J have commanded you : • 
Andj lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the 
ivorld, Amen, 

I HAVE already obferved to you that Chrift Jefx™, the: 
Head of the church, and Lord of ail, was now conltituting 
his prefent and fucceeding difoiples to be apoftles unto all na-- 
tions. My text is their commifllon, and general and particularr 
orders. In it they are direfted — 

I. To go and difciple all nations. 

II. To baptize them in the camt of the Father, ^c: . 



^4 The Mode and Subje8s [S^rrh. \rf. 

III. He dircfts thefc newly conftituted apoftles, and all 
their fucceflbrs, to teach their baptized difciples to obferVe all 
things whatfoever he had given In commandment. 

J.afily For their encouragement and comfort, he adds, 
And, \oi I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. 
Amen. 

What I purpofed to fay to yb^> pirtrcularly, upon xHi f^coiid 
propofition, I have laid. I fio'w recur to the 

I. Which contains Chrifl's command to Ms Sifclphs to gO 
and d'ljciple all nations. 

1 have already fhowed you \Vhat baptifm is, and the d'cfign 
of it. 1 am now, if the Lord will, to lay open w^hit is com- 
manded to be done before bapcilm be adminiftered, alfo the 
evidence which the Lord may atford me to prove to yoti that 
my inllrudlion is of him. 

Your feelings, my brethren arid people, hav6 no dou\)t been 
highly wrought up, whilft I have opened before y oil one of the 
laws of Chrift's kingdom amongft men. I have ftill moVe^ 
things to f*y unto you refpedling the rules and regulations of 
this kingdom. I pray the Lord, that your minds may be fo 
prepared to hear, that you may not forfake me and flee, as 
many of Chrift's profeffed friends did, when he preached on a 
fubjedt which greatly crofied their prejudices and carnal ex- 
pectations. 

Your bufy minds, no doubt, \viK, before you are aware, be. 
inquiring what great and good men, in our da^s and in the 
days of our fathers, have faid and thought of thefe things ; 
but we (hould look farther back than to our forefathers. The 
man Chrift Jtfus, and his infpired prophets and apoftles, 
Ihould be the men of our counfel. Should 1 fpeak according 
to thefe, you may hearken to me with fafety : if contrary* 
convid: me by the word and teftimOny of Jefus Chrift ; for I 
appeal to thefe, for by them I ought to be judged. 

One requeft, my hearers, I pray yoU to grant me ; tiamely 
— Lay prejudice afide, and let fcripture, reafon and fcommon 
fenfe be heard for a few minutes. 

Surely you muft confider my cafe more try in'g thkn Shy of 
yours. For it is, perhaps, as difficult for me to coihbat my 
own prejudices and carnal feelings, as it is for any of you to 
contend with his : Befides this, I have t© look your prejudices 
in the face, while I venture to bring any of your did pradlices 
to the fcriptures for trial. Yes, more than all this, I have 
many trials to encot3nter, which you have not, hoV tan havfe 



Serm. VI.] . of Baptifnu m 

I fhould not hiaVe made tlie attempt to brinpf our former 
pra6ltce to the ftandard for trial, had not my difficulties been 
fo greit, that I durft proceed no farther, without proving ihy 
works. One of my prRdt:es haih been Weighed in the balance, 
and is found wanting, 1 am now, if my heart deceive m^ 
not, willing to lead another of my works, or the fubje<rts on 
which fome of my works have been, to the bar for trial. If this 
ftiall be found of wood, hay or ftubbl'e, may the fire of truth 
btirh it up, and may the fire of love caufe me to rejoice 
whik it fliall be confuming. 

The propofition which will bring this other of my t^orks to 
the trial, is — 

elirift com-nan^s his riiinifters to go and difciple all nations. 
I have engaged to be one of thefe minifters. The command 
is, therefoie, binding upon me. I have gone forth, that I 
might obey. The great thing to be determined is, whether I 
have underftood what it is to difciple, or to make difciple^^ 
and have praAifed accordingly. 

The important queftion to be decided is juft this : If I dif^ 
ciple any of you who are parents, do I, as a neceifary cofefe- 
quence, difciple all your children and hoitfeholds ? 

The only d'^culty, m this qi^ftion, relates to children «hd 
houfeh'olds. What it is to difciple the mafter of a family, is a 
thing in which Chrrftians generally agree. 

1 ought juft to remark to ycu, that Titatheteufate^ to teach, is, 
in its literal atid gefiuine fenfe, to difciple, or fo to t^ach as to 
make difcipYes, 

To bring the queftion befbie you as fully as I can, I wifh 

'yoti, each dfte of you, to fix his atten^ion upon fome one family in 

ftliis town, in which family hot a Chriftran is to be found. If 

»ach one have his mind fixed upon fbch a Ghriftlefs houfehoid, 

ivill how put the queftion :-^ 

Suppofe I, inftrumentaUy, difciple the father of this family, 
f'Bo I, as a certain confeqUence, make difciples of the whole 
> family ? 

Before you determine the queftion, it may be well to iix in 
ryour minds what a difciple is. I^et the fcriptures fpeak. The 
^ifcipks were called Chriftians firft: at Antioch, .\cl3 xi. 26. 
iThe commiffion which Chrift gave to the firft minifters, and 
"to all fucceeding ones, as recorded Mark ivi. 15, 16, is. Go 
[ye into all the v^orld, and preach the gofpel to every cfeattiie ; 
•|ie lh^.vbelidn)ethyS^c. Here a behever is the fan^e as a difciple, . 
\itit we i^^ & difcipile, iti ihe i^tS^ ©f my ie3^, is a believer, a 



56 7he Mode and SubjeSfs [Serm. VL 

believer in Chrlft, a ChrKtlan. This is the idea which the New. 
Teftament, from beginning to end, gives us of a difciple. 
There is, however, mention made of difciples, who were fo 
but by profeffion, or who were vifible difciples anly ; not 
having the love of God in them. 

Now try the queftion with refpedl to both forts^ of thefe 
difciples. 

Suppofe I, inftrumentally, difciple the father of a Chriftlefs 
family, do T, as a necelfary confequence, make Chridians of all 
in his houfe ? You will pleafe to make up your minds, on this 
queftion, decidedly. 

Suppofe again, that I, inftrumentally, difciple the father of 
a Chrlftlefs family, do I, as a neceftary confequence, make 
'vi/ible difciples of all his family ? IoQX. ycur minds be clearly 
determined as to the anfwer. 

Once more ; fuppo^e I, by delivering the Lord's meffage,. 
convert, or make a difciple of the father of a Chrlftlefs family,, 
do I, of neceffary confequence, make any one ot his houfehold. 
befides himfelf a difciple ?* 

Let fcripture, let reafon, let common fenfe, let any thing 
fpeak, which will fpeak the truth, and determine thefe queftions, ' 
Confider, take advice, and fpeak your minds. 

Can you fuppofe, or can you not, that to make a father of a 
family a difciple, his wife, his fervants, and his children, are. 
all, difciples of courfe, or of neceflary confequence ? 

Is not this a clear cafe ? and yet the great and momentous 
fubjedl before us turns altogether upon the anfwer of this 
queftion. 

If difcipllng the father of a family renders all his houfe dit 
ciples, they are all fuhjeds of baptifm, they have the fcripture 
qualification for it ; if it do not, then they have not the qual- 
ification which jny text requires to be in thofe who are bap- 
tized. 

You will judge for yourfelves whether houfeholds do thus 
become difciples ; as for the reft, the fcriptures determine : if 
they be difciples, they are to be baptized ; if not, they are not 
to be. 

I know what your anfwer muft be, for by inconteftable fa«5ls, 
in this town, the difc*pling of a father of a family does not 
difciple his houfehold ; it doe? not even make them vifible difr 
ciples, or give them even the appearance of being fo. 

* Prejudice may reply, You are to difciple the houfehold by baptizing.^ 
t^em.. '1 his coRtradi<fts my text, that fays, difciple them f rfh - 



Serm. tL'] of Baptifnu 31 

The -following Is for evidence, that perfons muft be made 
difciples before they are baptized. 

1. John made his hearers difciples before he baptized them. 
He required, in order for baptifm, that they fh^nld bring forth 
fruits meet for, or as evidence of, repentance, Matt. iii. 8. and 
Luke iii. 8. 

2. Chrlft's difciples baptized none but fuch as were made 
difciples firft, John iv. i, 2. 

3. Ghrift, in my text, gives no liberty to baptize any but 
ibch as are firft difcipled. Yes, he commands his minifters to 
difciple before thev baptize. 

jj The account which Mark gives us of the Apoftles' commif- 
I fion, and of the Baptifmal Tnftitution, is confirming evidence in 
' this matter, xvith chapter, 15th and 16th verfes ; * Preach the 
i| gofpei to every creature : He that believeth, and is baptized,' 
ji •&c. Here believing is put before baptifm. The way adopt- 
[ cd by fome to avoid the force of this text is, if they be bap- 
I tizcd, fay they, no matter when, before or after believing. This 
way of getting clear of tlie difficulty appears neither wife nor 
j candid ; for it Injures the plain meaning of the text, and 
! makes Matthew's and Mark's account of the conKnifiioh to 

difae^ree. 
' What remains are a number of plain truths, fa^s arid con- 
fequences, which have a more near or remote relation with 
the fuhjed on hand, and may ferve to throw light upon it. 

In the First place, we may take notice of two particulars, 
which perhaps have not been fufficiently noticed. 

One is, the ceremonial law, and the covenant of circumcifion 
which v/as annexed to it, appear to be difannulled and paft 
away. 

The following may make this matter plain : The difannulling 

or abolifhing of the law we fee, Heb. vii. 18- There is verily 

a difannulling of the commandment going before, for the 

weaknefs and unprofitablenefs thereof Alfo Gal. iii. ipt 

Wherefore then ferveth the law ? It was added becaufe of 

tranfgrefliuns til/ the feed fhould come to tuhom the promifi was 

made. What leed this is, to whom the promife was made, 

we are told in the 16th vctCq of the fame chapter, *' Now to 

Abraham and his feed Were the promifes made : He faith not 

■|^ feeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy feed, which is 

^Khrift." We hence fee, that Chrift was the feed to whom the 

■P^romifes were made, and that the /aw (the ceremonial law) was 

»?^dded becaufe of tranfgreffions, tiU the feed, i. e. Chriftj fhould 



58 The Mode and Subjects [Serm. VI. 

come. It is hence plain, that the ceremonial law was to con- 
tinue no longer than till Chrift came. 

The covenant of circumcifion appears to be annexed to this 
law. For fays Jefus Chrift, John vii. 23, If a man on the fab- 
bath day receive circumctfion, that the lanv of Mofes fliould not 
be hrokerii are ye angry at me ? &c. 

That this covenant of circumcifion, or the SInai covenant, 
which includes it, hath paffed away^ or is difannulled, fee Heb. 
vili. 13. * In that he faith a new covenant, he hath made the 
firft old : now that which decayeth and waxeth old, is ready 
to vanllh away.' 

Befides, circumcifion is evidently a very important part of 
that law, which is difannulled ; for, faith Paul to the Galatians^ 
chap. V. 2, 3. If ye be circiimcifed^ Chrift ^2^ profit you nothing. 
For I tefti fy again, fays he, to every man that is clrcumctfedy 
that he Is a debtor to do the whole law. 

It is hence plain, that the ceremonial law Is no longer bind- 
ing ; and that the covenant of circumcifion, which was incor- 
porated with it, hath vanKhed away. 

The other particular is this ; the promifes which were made 
to Abraham and his feed, were not made to him in circumcifion^ 
but in uncircumcifion ; and the covenant which was confirmed 
of God to Abiaham in Chrift, was while he was in uncircumci^ 
Jio!^i and about twenty-four years before the covenant of circunt' 
cifion was given. Rom. iv. 8, 9, 10. — Gah iii. 16, 17. — Gen» 
xii. 3, 4, 7, and xvii. 10, 17. 

Moreover, when Paul fpeaks of the covenant which was 
confirmed of God in Chrift, he points out the exa<5t year when 
this was made known or confirmed with Abraham, as though 
he had a forefight, as certainly the Holy Ghoft had, of the con- 
tention which Ihould be long continued for want of judicioufly 
underftanding what covenant fhould be difannulled, and what 
covenant the law could not difannul. He tells us, Gal. iii. 1 7, 
that this covenant, which cannot be made void, was four hun- 
dred and thirty years before the law ; whereas the covenant of 
circumcifion was about four hundred and fix years before the 
law, with which circumcifion was united. 

Seeing matters are thus, what, I pray you, my hearers, have 
we to do with the covenant of circumcifion ? If we keep it,, 
Chrift fhall profit us nothing ; if we obferve fomething which 
we fubftitute in its place, Chrift may profit us as little in fuch 
obfervance. 



Serm. VL] of Baptlfnu 59 

I know it will be afked, Is not the church the fame now 
that it was in Abraham's day ? I anfwer, yes, and the fame 
that it was in Noah*s, Enoch's, and Adam's, and the fame that 
it ever will be. It will be afked again, Is not ihe covenant the 
fame which it was in Abral'am's time ? Yes, the covenant 
which was confirmed of God in Chrift is unchangeably the 
fame ; but the covenant of circumcifion which God made with 
Abraham, renewed with Ifaac and Jacob, and folemnized with 
Ifrael in the wildemefs, (^Z)f«/ xxix lo, ii, I2, 13,) is far 
from being the covenant, the neiv covenant^ which God makes 
with the houfe of Ifrael in our day. The covenant of circum- 
cifion was, more than 1700 years ago, decaying, waxing old, 
and ready to vanifh away. But you will again fay, Is not the 
church compofed of parents and children, and of houfeholds, 
now, as it was in Abraham's day ? Let Paul anfwer how it 
was (as touching the gofpel) in Abraham's day and after. 
Rom. ix 6, 7, 8. < They are not all Ifrael which are of Ifrael, 
neither becaufe they are the feed of Abraham, are ihey all 
children : but in Ifaac ftiall thy feed be called. That is, they 
that are the children of the flefh, thefe are not the children of 
God : but the children of the promife are counted for the 
feed.* Juft fo now. The children of God, the children of 
the promife are counted for the feed, and compofe the church ; 
and of thofe who appear thus fhoiild the vifible church be 
made up, and of none elfe. But, if by the queftion be meanr, 
Does not church- memberftiip defcend from parents to chil- 
dren, and from matters to fervants, as it appears to have done 
under the old covenant of circumcifion ? 1 he anfwer is. The 
New-Teftament no where acknowledges, nor does it know, any 
thing about a church thus made up. I would that all good 
men would confent to take New.'ieftament dire<5lions and ex- 
amples by which to conftitute and guide New-Teftament 
churches. 

But it will be afked once more, Hath not baptifm come 
into the place of circumcifion, and to be applied to limilar fub- 
jedt ? Anfiver. Circumcifion was a pcfitive inftitution, and 
*fo is baptiirr. Abraham and the Ifrael ites knew nothing to 
whom circumcifion fhould be adminiftered, but as they receiv- 
ed direction from the Divine Inftitutor ; juft fo it is with re- 
fpeft to the adminiftration of baptifm. The Chriftians at An- 
tloch, the Eiders at Jerufalem, the church of Galatia, and Paul 
and Barnabas, knew nothing, of baptifm being fubftituted for 
circumcifion, 4^^ xv, i to 35 j Gal iii, and v. chapters. We 



60 The Mode and Subjetls [Serm. VI. 

know nothing, and can know nothing, as to whom baptlfm is 
to be adminiftered, but from what Chrift hath told us as to the 
fubjeds. Now — 

Sscondlyy I afk, What evidence have we from the Bible that 
infants are to be baptized ? 

You may reply, They are included in the covenant. What 
covenant ? In that of circumcifion ? Surely not, for that 
hath vaniflied away. If you fay. In the covenant that was con- 
firmed of God in Chrift, I anpiver, \i was not this covenant 
which entitled Abraliam's houfehold to circumciiion ; there- 
fore, though your children be In this covenant, that does not, 
cf itfelf, entitle them to baptifm ; whether baptifm be in the 
place cf circumcifion, or not. You will then fay, What can 
entitle our children to baptifm ? Atifwer, Their being difci- 
ples, and fo coming within the compafs, or pale, of the baptif- 
jmal inftitution. 

As we can know nothing of the fubjeds of baptifm, any 
more than Abraham and ifrael could of the fuhjeds of cir- 
cumcifion, but from what we are informed in the inftitution, 
and in what is faid upon it, we will inquire what the Bible faith 
of this matter. 

If the Lord, in his word, hath not given us fufficient in- 
f^rudion upon this fubjeft, we muft pradiie in the dark, for 
we have no where elfe to go. 

We will begin with John. i. Did he baptize any children ? 
We have no evidence that he did. Befides, he told the mul- 
titude which attended his miniftry, not to plead Abraham, or 
Abraham's covenant, as a title to baptifm. Matt. iii. 7, 8, 
9, 10. 

2. Did Chrift's difciples, whilft he was with them, and 
whilft they made and baptised more difcipks than John, baptize 
infants, or any vifibly unbelieving children ? No evidence that 
they did. 

g. Is there any evidence from my text, which contains the 
words of the inftitution, that infants, or unbelieving houfeholds, 
were to be baptized l None ; but the contrary. 

4. Is there any paflage in the New Teftament, which com» 
mands, or fays fo much as one word, that infants are to be 
baptized ? Not one. 

5. Is there any example, which fhows that the apoftles bap- 
tized any upon the faith of parents^ or raafters, or upon th,e 
iaith or promifes of any others i 



Serm. VI.] of Bapufm. 61 

I know, my brethren, there are three in(laiCil^ which are fup- 
pofed by fome to favour the affirmative of the queftion. I have 
rather been of the fame opinion. If it be fo, may fa<n:s con- 
vince us. 

We will look at each of thefe examples feparately. 

The firft fuppo^d example we find at Philippi. Here was 
a woman, named Lydia ; fhe appears to have been a woman 
of bufmefs. She belonged to Thyatira, but was now at Phi- 
lippi, probably felling her merchandize, with feveral attendants. 
The hiftory is thus related, jltts xvi. 13th, 14th and 15th verfes. 
*' On the fabbath day, we (Paul and other difciples) went out 
of the city, by a river fide, where prayer was wont to be made, 
and wc fat down, and fpake unto the women who reforted 
thither. And a certain woman, named Lydia, a feller of 
purple, of the city of Thyatira, who worlhipped God, heard 
us, whofe heart the Lord opened, that fhe attended unto the 
things which were fpoken of Paul. And when (he was bap- 
tized and her houfehold, fhe befought us, faying. If ye have 
judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my houfe and 
abide there." 

This is all we know of the matter. She belonged to another 
city. She worfhipped God. She was, on the fabbath day, by 
the fide of a river, where prayer was wont to be made. 
The Lord opened her heart to attend to what Paul faid. Her 
fervants were with her. She had a houfe, eidier her own, 
or one taken for the time. She was baptized, and her houfe- 
hold» As.to her having infants with her, you can tell, as well 
as I. Moreover, whether her fervants believed the words of 
Paul, you can, if you attend to the circumftances, form as 
corred a judgment, perhaps, as any other can make up for 
you. 

The things to be confidered are, i. Lydia was a godly wo- 
man. 2. She attended meeting. Paul found her where prayer 
was wont to be made, where religious women had been accuf- 
tomed to meet. 3. She, like other religious people, took her 
houfehold to meeting with her. 4. It appears that Paul bap- 
tized none of her houfehold, but iuch as were with her at the 
female praying meeting. 5. The ftrong probability is, that 
Lydia, being a pious woman, one who worfhipped God, would 
fele<5l for her attendants, maidens or fervants who alfo were 
worfhippers of God. In verfe 40, we are told, the apoftles 
entered into the houfe of Lydia, comforted the brethren, &c. 
F 



62 - The Mode and Suhjetls [Serm. VI. 

You will weighHefe circumftances, and make up for your- 
selves, fo far as you can, a righteous judgment. 

The next example is lecorded in the fame chapter, and ap- 
pears to be in the fame city. The hiftcry of the matter is con- 
tained in the 25th verfe, and on to the 34th. The noticeable 
fa<5ts, and on which we muft make up our judgment, are' — 
The jailer fays, Sirs, What muft I do to be faved ? Paul and 
Silas anfwered, Believe on the Lord Jefus Chrift, and thou 
fhak be faved, and thy houfe. And they fpake unto him the 
word of the Lord, and to all that were in his houfe. And he 
was baptized, he and all his, ftraightway — and rejoiced, believ- 
ing in God with all his houfe. 

Here are three things to be put together, i. The word of 
the Lord Jefus was fpoken to them all. 2. They were all 
baptized. 3. They all believed in God. Whether here be any 
example of infant baptifm, you will judge, each one for him- 
felf. 

As fom.e have fuppofed that this paffage, and a few others 
of fimilar import, afford an argument in favour of fprinkling, 
it may be well to give it a moment's confideration. Here we 
are told, that the keeper of the prifon brought out Paul and 
Silas. Where he brought them to, feems plainly enougli to 
be gatliered from the 3 2d verfe, in which we find them fpeak- 
ing to the jailer the word of tlie Lord, and to all that were 
in his houfe. In the next verfe we are informed that the 
jailer and all his were baptized. Where they were baptized, 
we are not told. One thing however is plain, it was not in 
the houfe ; for ia verfe 34 it is faid. When (i. e. after the 
houfehold were baptized) he had brought them into his houfe, 
he fet meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God, with 
all his houfe. From thefe obfervations, the following things 
appear : — i. That Paul and Silas were in the jailer's houfe, 
when they fpake the word of the Lord to all that were in his 
houfe. 2. That when the ordinance of baptifm was admin- 
illered, they were not in his houfe. 3. I'hat the mode of 
baptizing then in ufe rendered it inconvenient to be per- 
formed in the jailer's houfe. 4. After the ordinance was 
adminiftered, they went into the houfe. How this favouis 
fprinkling, I fee not. 

The other fuppofed example Is in i Cor. i. 16, where Paul 
fays, I baptized aUb the houfehold of Stephanas. In the i6ih 
chap. i5ih verfe, we have a fhort hiftory of S^'ephanas's houfe- 
hold ; it is thuS; '« Ys know the houf?'.iol.d of Stephana?, that it 



Serm. VI.] ^/ Baptifvu 63 

is the firft fruits of Achala, and that they have addicted tliem- 
felves to the minidry of the faints," Whether there is here 
found any evidence of infant baptifm, you will determine for 
^yourfelves. - 

6. Are the encouragements which are given to parents in 
behalf of their children, made to their havir.g them baptized ; 
or are the bleflings conne<5led with their dedicating them to the 
Lord, and with their bringing them up in his nurture and admo- 
nition ? With which, your Dibles will inform you. 

7. Do we, or do any, pretend, that there is any certain 
evidence, from either precept or example, for the baptizing of 
infants ? Indeed there is none. Probably not many fuppoffe 
it. 

8. Is there, as fome have affirmed, the fame evidence for 
baptizing infants, that there is for obferving the Lord's day, 
for admitting females to communion, and which there is for 
family prayer ? 

There is a day called the Lord's day, and religious things 
were to be obferved on it. Are there infants, who are called 
baptized infants, and are they to be attended to as fuch ? 

Females and males are declared to be all one in Chrilt, and 
fo fit fubje<Sts for the communion of faints. Are infants une- 
quivocally declared to be fit rubje(5l3 of baptifm ? 

We have examples of family prayer, and are commanded to 
pray with all prayer. Are there fcripture examples of infant 
baprifm, and are we commanded to baptize all ; and fo are 
infants included ? 

9. Ought I to teach you infant baptifm, if cyir Lord Jefus 
Chrifl hath no where direded me to do thus ? 

JO. Hath Jefus Chrift fpcken one word of b.iptifm, as being 
fubftituted for circumcifion ? Hath he any where commanded 
his minifters to teach this fubftitution ? 

Thirdly. Shall we go, and are we unde'r the neceflity of 
going, to the law and covenant of circumcifion, to prove infant 
baptifm, when both this law and covenant have long fmce 
waxed old, been repealed, and have periflied ? Heb. vii. 18, 
19, and viii. 13. 

But you will afk, Are not the bkffings of Abraham come 
on the Gentiles ? Anf. Yes. You will then faf, f\xt not our 
children included in the promife ? Auf'u>er. If they be Chrift's, 
then are they Abraham's feed, and heirs according to the 
promife. Gal. iii. 29. Abraham's children, after the flefh, 
were not included in the promife, as the Pedobaptifts of our day 



u4 The Mode and Subjects [Serm. VI. 

would have theirs. But you will fay again, Are not our chil- 
dren included in the covenant ? In what covenant ? In that 
of circumcifion ? Surely not. For though that covenant was 
often renewed, yet it hath long fince pa/Ted away. Is your 
quellion this ? Are they not included in that covenant, which 
was confirmed of God in Chrift, twenty-four years previoufly 
to the covenant of circumcifion ? I anfwer, No man knoweth, 
nor can know, but as your children give evidence, that they 
pofTefs the Spirit of Chrift. Bat as I have obferved to you 
before, io I fay again, even were your children included in 
this covenant, and faints ; this does not of itfelf give them 
any right to baptifm, any moie, than Abraham's Deing in- 
cluded in the fame covenant gave him a right to circumcifion. 
This covenant determines nothing as to the one, or the other. 
The covenant of circumcifion determined who were to be cir- 
cumcifed. So the ordinance or inftitution of Baptifm deter- 
mines who are to be baptized. One determines no more 
who are to be admitted to the other, than does the covenant 
of an everlafting priefthood (Numb. xxv. 13.) determine 
who ftiall be minifters in gofpel days. In ihort, there is no 
arguing from one to the other in this matter. They are both 
of them pofitive inftitutions, and nothing can be known of 
cither, but what is revealed in its particular inftitution. 

While viewing this fubjed, you will inquire, What will be- 
come of cur children ? I anfwer, God only knoweth. You 
may rejoin ; But what (hall we do for them ? Anf. Dedicate 
them to God, and, like faithful Chriftians, bring them up for 
him. 

Fourthly. We will now attend to fome legitimate confe- 
quences which folio v^, upon fuppofition that the fubjefts of bap- 
tifm are to be determined from the fubjefts of circumcifion. 

I. One confequence is, every man who is converted to the 
Chriftian religion is to be baptized, and all his houfehold, 
though he may have three hundred and feventeen training fol- 
diers born in his own houfe. Not only are thefe foldiers to be 
baptized, but their wives, children, and all other fervants, who 
belong to this great man's houfe. A thoufand infidels are to 
be baptized, becaufe one great man, their mafter, is chriftian- 
ized. 

a. Thefe foldiers, with their wives, children and fervants, 
are all to be confidered and treated as church members, or as 
being in covenant. I confefs this does not look to me gofpel* 
like. 



Serm. VI.j of Baptifm. 65 

3. Another confecpence is, the adults among thefe, and 
among all others, who are baptized, are not only to be admit- 
ted to the communion, but required to come. I afk, Could 
fuch a communion be called the communion of faints ? — one 
great and good man, with hundreds of unconverted fervants ! 

4. All who have been baptized, and have not, for mifde- 
raeanor, been expelled the church, have a right to baptifm for 
their children ; and no man may forbid them. 

5. Another confequence is, notvvivhftanding Chrlft faith, 
My kingdom is not of this world ; yet the regulations were 
fuch, efpecially tl e mean of admiinon into it, as ftrongly, and 
of infallible confequence, tended to make it of this world, 
and that abundantly fo. 

6. Another confequence is, many learned and pious min- 
ifters of New-England are inconfiilent with themfeives, in 
requiring of perfons baptized in infancy a profeffion cf experi- 
mental religion, as a term of communion. It was not fo done 
in Ifrael. 

7. Another confequence is, many of the fame pious and 
learned minifters are very inconfiftent with themfeives, in refu- 
fmg bapiifm to the children of fuch as are, by their baptifm, 
in regular church memberfliip, or in covenant, as it is termed. 

I have taken, as you obferve, for granted, what I do not 
believe to be true, that fprinkling, or a very partial wafiiing, is 
baptifm. 

Lajlly. Another confequence is, it doth, fo far as it hath its 
psrfeEt nvork, deftroy the very idea of the gofpel church, con- 
tradia the prophets, and make Paul and ethers fpeak not 
the truth, and it throws us back to the (late of the Jewifiv 
church. 

Jeremiah, prophefying cf the gofpel church, faich, chap. 
xxxi. 31 to 34, Behold the days come, faith the Lord, that'l 
will make a new covenant with the houfe of Ifrael, and with 
the houfe of Judah ; not according to the covenant that I 
made with your fathers, in the day that 1 took them by the 
hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt ;- but this (liall 
be the covenant that I will make with the houfe of Ifrael, 
After thofe days, faith the Lord, I will put my law in their 
inward parts, and write it in their hearts ; and will be their 
God, and they fhall be my people. And the^ (liall teach no 
more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, fay- 
ing, Know the Lord, for they ftiall all know me, from tlie 
lead of them, unto the greateft of them, faith the Lord» 
F2 



G6 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. VI. 

If this means any thing, it certainly means tliat the gofpel 
church fhall exceed in purity the Jewifh church ; that it (hall, 
at leaft, be compofed of profelling faints. Ifaiah fays, chap, 
liv. 13, All thy children (hall be taught of the Lord. The 
latter af thef^ palfiges, our Lord applies to the gofpel day^ 
John vi. 45 : The former is applied to the gofpel church by 
Paul, Heh. viii. 

Mofes fays in Deut. xviii. 15, 19. The Lord thy God will 
ralfe up unto thee a Prophet from the midfl: of thee, of thy 
brethreai, like unto me ; unto him ye fhall hearken. And it 
(hall come to pafs, that whofoever will aot hearken unto my 
words, which he fhiU fpcak in my name, I will require it of 
him. 

This, and much more, Peter applies to gofpel days, and to 
the gofpel church, A^s iii. 22, to the end. Mofes truly faid 
unto the fathers, A Prophet (hall the Lord your God raife up 
unto you, of your brethren, like unto me; him fhall ye hear 
in all things whatfoever he fhall fay unto you. And it fliriU 
come to pafs that every fonl that will not hear that Prophet^ 
^2Xi\>Q dejlroyed from among the people. Yea, ahd all the proph- 
ets from Samuel, and thofe that follow after, as many as have 
fpoken, have likewlfe foretold of thefe dayc. Ye are the chil- 
dren of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made 
with our fathers, faying unto Abraham, And in thy feed Qiall 
all the kindreds of the earth be ble/Ted. Unto you firft, God 
having raifed up his Son JeHis, fent him to blefs you in turn- 
ing away every one of yjCM from, his iniquities. 

Through ihe New-Teltament, the gofpel church is, or ap- 
pears to be, fpoken of as a fociety, nation or church of faints ; 
and as being gTeatly di£F:frent fro^^i the nation of the Jews. 
But the fubjeils of baptifm being determined by the fubjeds 
of circumcifion, brings the gofpel church, as to its conftituent 
materials, to the fame condition with the church under the law 
of carnal ordinances. Indeed, what is now, generally, called 
the gofpel church, is haidly to be diftinguifhed by its members 
from the old Jewifh church. 

Do not thefe things look as though the twelve hundred and 
fixty years of Antichrift's reign were not wholly paft ? Is there 
not, my brethren, fome deSiing error at the root of all this ? 
Can fuch dreams, as are thefe confequences, flow from a pure 
fountain I Indeed many good minifters of our land have long 
iince difcovered fome of thefe evil confequences, and have la^ 
boured hard \o re^ify tjhem» Prefident Edwards, and many 



ievn}, VI.] of Bapti/m. 67 

others, made a noble ftand againft this flood of corruption ; 
yet they difcovered not the fountain, whence thefe ftre«irriS flow, 
and vili fl )W, till it be removed. Putting or miftaking the 
covenant of cu-cumcifion, for the covenant which was confirm- 
ed of God in Chnfl to Abraham, twenty-four years before 
circumcifion was known, and fublli.uilng baptifm for circum- 
cificn, and deierniining the fubjccfli of the one by the fuhjedls 
of the other, without any auihoiity tluu to do, have produced 
ill tliis corruption, deception, and world of evil. Would good 
ininillcrs be pcrluaded to lay the axe at the rout of ihjc tree, as 
John did, the evils would be foon rf<flificd. 

Thcfuhjed, on which vie now arc, is of furh high conccrn- 
Hient to ihe church of Chrift, generally, and your convidion 
of the truth of it being almoft, or quite, elTintial to our future 
I>cace and union together, I would willingly omit nothing 
which might chafe away your darknefs and caufe the true 
light to appear. 1 will, therefore, add here the hiftory of 
infant baptifm. Should we find that infant baptifm is of men, 
as we have already found fprinklin^ to be, it is hoped that you 
will either give it -ip, or piidtife it as being of man's device, 
and not, ai> Mr. DIckinfon would have it, as belonging to in- 
faiits by divine right. 

I'he fir ft information which we have of infant baptifm is a- 
bout the middle of the fccond century ; about which time Ire- 
ngejs, in one of his cpiftlo, has the following fentence : '* The 
church received a tradition from the apoftlcs to adminifter bap- 
tifm to iittlc children or infants."* 

The next account we have cf this matter (if we except 
'i'crtuliian, who oppofed the pradicc) is given us by Origen, 
in about the n.iddlc of the tliird century. His words are, 
*• Little children are baptized for i!ie remilHon ot fins.'* For 
the reiTii{£on of original fin, or pollution ; for of this is he 
fpeaking. Agcdn he fays, ♦* ri:e ch\irch had ^Vi order {loia 
the apollles to ^ive bapiifiu to infants.'* 

Another part of the liiftory of infant baptifm we have in a 
quouiionfrom the decifionsof the famous Council at Carthage 
in the year 253. It is this: "From baptifm and the grace of 
God time ought to \^t prohllited ; efpecially infants neul our help 
and the divine mercy." We have a farther account from 
Auguftine, who flourilhed about the middle of the fourtJi cen- 
mry. His words (writing of infant baptifm) are, "Let ncue, 

* Prcf, PickiBfoB on Baptifin. 



6S The Mode and Subjecls [Serm. VL 

therefore, fo much as nvhijper any other doflrlne in your ears : 
This the church hath always had, has always held." 

The next we hear of infant baptifm is, that the pra(n:ice was 
confirmed, and fo put beyond difpute, by Pope Innocent the 
Fira. 

Now fire and fword were the all-conclufive arguments ufed 
for the conviction and reformation of all who refufed to prac- 
tife, or dared to call in queftion, infant baptifm. We will pafs' 
over the horrid perfecuiions, which now began to be, and have 
ever fmce been pradifed, at intervals, upon thofe who would 
not fubmit to the divine right of infants to baptifm, as confer- 
red on them by the ghoftly Popes of Rome. 

Luther, the famous German reformer, fays, " that infant 
baptifm was not determined till Pope Innocentius ;" and Gro- 
tius, in his annotations on Matth. xix. fays, *' It was not en- 
joined till the Council of Carthage."* 

We ought, however, to trace the hiftory of infant baptifm 
one ftep farther, and notice Calvin, and a multitude fince, who 
were unwilling to acknowledge their dependence on the 
Mother of Harlots, for their authority in this matter ; and tliere- 
fore with great ingenuity have dlfcovered infant baptifm, as a 
gofpel ordinance, or the right of infants to it, in the law of 
Mofes. Indeed they have fuppofed that this dodlrine is implied 
in a number of paffages of the New- Teilament. Yet, I be- 
lieve, none who praftife it, are willing to venture this New- 
Teftament ordinance upon Nsw-Teftament evidence. 

Here you fee that tradition is the foundation of infant bap- 
tifm ; errory the belief that baptifm <wafies away original fm^ the 
nurfe of its tender age; the church of Rome, the confirmer 
and ftrong defender of it ; and the long fince repealed cere- 
monial law of MofcF, the evidence for it. You fee, the introduc- 
tion of infant baptifm was tradition. Upon this foundation 
hath it manifeftly refted ever fince. All the ingenious argu- 
ments ot learned and pious men, can, in fa«fl, add no ftrength 
to its firft foundation. The firft we hear of it is, it was placed 
upon tradition, and there it hath refted, or been ftanding un- 
eafily, ever fince. 

Befides, this tradition^ as well as the pradice which follow- 
ed, is doubtlefs the offspring of error, and man's invention. 
At befl we have but one witnefs for it, in the mouth of whom 
nothing can be eftablifiied. Origen fays, " The church had 
an order from the Apoilles." Still we have but one witnefs, 
* Ancient Dialogue Revifed. 



Serm. VIL] of Baptifm. 69 

Moreover, the very expreflions of the Pedobaptifts fliow that 
they were fro m the beginning oppofed by the Baptifts. Ire- 
yTiScus fays, "We have a tradition." Origen fays, " We have 
an order." The Council of Carthage fay, " Infants ought 
not to be prohibited from baptifm.** Auguftine faith, " Let 
none fo much as whifper any other doftrine in your ears." — 
Does not every fy liable indicate the difpute which the Baptifts 
had with the inventers and lupporters of this anti-evangelical 
principle and practice ? 

It is worthy of a moment's confideration, that not one of 
the moft ancient fatliers makes the leaft pretenfion that infant 
baptifm is fupported by fo much as one paffage in either the 
Old-Teftament, or the New ; and they mention no authority 
but tradition i and an order from the Apoftles, &c. which, at 
beft, are very uncertain things. 

Whoever can fix their faith, continue their pradtice, and 
venture their refponfibility on fuch a traditionary foundation, 
I cannot. Upon this foundation for our pradtice, have both 
we and our fathers ventured to oppofe the Baptifts, with great- 
er or lefs degrees of virulence j whilft, by our tradition, we 
have greatly injured the ordinance of Chrift, if not, in tliis 
inftance, made void the law of God. 

In fine ; Was not infant baptifm firft introduced to efcape 
the offence of the crofs ? Is it not, with many, unknowingly 
continued for the fame end ? It bringeth the church to its 
former ftate as under the law. If I yet preach circumciJioH, 
why do I yet fuffer perfecution ? Then is tlie offence of the 
crofs ceafed, GaL v. ii. 

SERMON VII. 

MATTHEW xxviii. 19, 20. 

Go ye^ therefore, and teach all nations, hapti%ing them in the name 
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghojl ; teaching 
them to obferve all things 'whatfocver I have commanded you : 
and, lo, I am luith you alway, even unto the end of the 
<world. Amen, 

I HAVE already fet before you the principal part of what 
I intended under the two firft propofitions in my text. 
What remains is to bring forward — 



70 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. VIL 

III. Chrift*s command to all his miniftering fervants to 
teach all nations, or thofe who (lioiild be difcipled among them, 
to obferve all things whatfoever he had commanded them. 
And then — 

Lajlly. His comforting and ftrengthening promife, which 
is. And, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end oi the 
world. 

To thefe propofitions, your ferious, Chrillian attention is 
requefted. The lirft is — 

III. Chrift*s command to the minifters of his gofpel to 
teach all nations, or thofe who flionld be difcipled among them, 
to obferve all things whatfoever he had commanded them. 

Here you fee the extenfivenefs of my orders received, and 
which I muft carefully obferve, would I be obedient unto the 
Heavenly Teacher, who camc/from God. 

Chrift Jefus, when perfonally on earth, gave a new edition of 
his own and his Father's mind and will. In this new edition, 
he abrogated or left out, many ceremonies of the old, as being 
no longer ufeful. Under the old edition, the church was in 
it# childhood, and therefore under fuch tutors and governors 
as were not needed in her riper years. In this new edition, 
Chrift hath pointed out what is to be preferved of the old. 
The fum of the moral law and the prophets, were to continue 
in force. Thefe are, indeed, in the very nature of things, bind* 
ing on accountable creatures. Bat when Chrift, the anointed 
and expeded Meffiah, was come, then all thofe rites, facrilices 
and typical inftitutions of the ceremonial law, which were, 
together, as a fchool-mafter to lead the obferver to Chrift, were 
difinnulled, being no longer of ufe. 

You fee what minifters have authority to teach for both doc- 
trine and pradice. It is what Chrift hath commanded them, 
and nothing which is contrary from it. 

In time paft I have taught you the precepts of Chrift, fome- 
what largely. As I have taught them, fo you have, as is be- 
lieved, received them to the fiving of your fouls. The ordf* 
nance of the fupper I have taught in its fimplicity, and fo have 
you received it. You have alfo been informed, that Jefus 
Chrift appointed baptifm, as an ordinance to be obferved in his 
church. But what that ordinance was, and who were the fub- 
jedls of it, you have not been particularly told, till of late. 
Nor had I, till a (hort time fince, a clear underftanding of 
either. I, no doubt, ought to have known them before ; but 
till I did, I could not teach th^m to you. When I came t« 



Serm. VII.] of Baptifm. *f 1 

the knowledge of them, It was no longer in my power to be 
faithful to Chrift, and refufe to teach them. In the fimplicity 
of my heart have 1 taught you what is baptifm, and who are 
to be baptized. 

Whether thefe things be, or be not, agreeable to my former 
notions of them, is nothing to the point. One thing I am 
fettled in, I have, of late, taught them to you, as Chrift hath 
commanded me. 

Not only was it my duty to teach yon thefe things, but I am 
commanded to teacli you to obfe: ve tliem : For then are you 
Chrift*s difciples, when you do all things whatfoever he hath 
commanded you. 

To obferve thefe things, is like obedient children to receive 
inftru<ftion, and then to fearch the fcriptures, that you may know 
how thefe things are. It belongs to me to teach you — 

1. To obferve thefe things till you underftand them. And 
then — 

2. To obferve them in your pracJlice. 

1 . Would you walk in all the ftatutes and ordinances of the 
Lord blamelefs, you muft obferve thefe things till you under- 
ftand them. 

You and I have been unreafonably prejudiced againft light 
and tryth in thefe matters. If I do not misjudge, the Lord 
hath, in anfwer to prayer, afforded me the needed light and 
knowledge upon the fubjeft. It was not in a day, nor in a 
month, after my prejudices received a ITiock, and my mind 
partial convlftion, that I obtained fatisfa€tion. Nor can I 
€xpe<n: that you will, all of you, poffefs fuch a ready mind, as to 
give up your long, and almoft inveterate prejudices, and re- 
ceive the light at once. It is by little and little, that anti- 
chriftian errors muft be deftroyed from the chuich, and from 
your hearts, as well as from mine. 

You may expe(5l to find me ready, at any time, and at all 
times, to afford you every inftru<SIon, and to anfwer any ob- 
je<5tion which may occur to your candid minds. You fhould 
have your Bibles always nigh you, and poffefs continually a 
prayerful, teachable fpirit. Be determined to hearken to none 
but Chrift, and to be obedient to all his commands. 

Be careful to avoid all bittemefs and evil fpeaking. Wif- 
dom will not dwell with ft rife \ nor will the wrath of man 
work the righteoufnefs of God. 

2. It belongs to me to teach you to obferve the ordinance of 
baptifm, and the proper fuhjedls, in your pradllce. You muft 



"^2 The Mods and Subje^s [Serm. VII. 

underftand thefe things before you can acceptably pradlife 
them. Some of you, no doubt, fufficiently underftand them to 
proceed to pradice. But I have not thought it duty to haftcn 
your pTa<5tice, or to lead you by example, left the minds of 
others fhould be injured. It is a time to weaken prejudices, 
and not to increafe them. Wifdom dwells with prudence. Ma- 
ny of your minds, as well as mine, are, with pleafing expectation, 
looking forward to the time, when we may, with nighly or 
quite all our brethren with us, keep all the ordinances of the 
gofpel, as Chrift hath commanded us. 

When you fliall underftand thefe things, happy will you be 
if you pradlife them ; for all gofpel obedience gives pleafure 
iii the pradtice. 

As Mofes had much to do in Egypt, before God faid unto 
him, * Speak unto the people that they go forward,* fo, my 
brethren, I may have much to do before things ftiall be in read- 
inefs, and before the Lord ftiall hid me fpeak, faying unto you. 
Go FORWARD. But, if the Lord will, I would live to fee that 
day. 

After Ifrael went forward, and were baptized under Mofes 
in the cloud, and in the fea, they had a tedious wildernefs to 
pafs ; fo it may be with us. But, ftiould we obferve the pillar 
of cloud and of fire, we ftiall come to the promifed land ; and 
it may be, with much fafety and fpeed, fhould we hearken to 
the good counfel of Jofhua. 

You know, my brethren, as it is my duty to teach you to 
obferve all things whatfoever Chrift hath commanded me, fo 
it is your duty to receive inftrudtion, and be obedient. Your 
obedience is not to be rendered to me, but to Jefus Chrift, and 
to the word of his teftimony. 

It will doubtlefs occur to your minds. Whom fliall we hear ? 
One minlfter teaches us one thing, and another teaches diff'er- 
ently. You are to hear no man any farther than he fhall teach 
you as the man Chrift Jefus hath commanded him. Minifters 
have no authority, any farther than they receive it from him. He 
hath given them no power to leach, but what he hath com- 
manded. When they tranfcribe out of the old into the new edi- 
tion of God's word and will, and tell us that the rite and cov- 
enant of circumcifion are to explain to us the obfervance of 
a New-Teftament ordinance, we are not obliged to believe them, 
unlefs they point us to the place where Chrift hath fo command - 
ed. You are to obey them who have the rule over you. But 
even Paul was not to be followed any farther than he followed 



Serm. Vil.] of Bapiifm. 73 

Chrift. So it 0U3;ht to be with you, in hearkening to what your 
teachers fay. Mlniflers are but men, and they have proved 
themfelves to be fo, by changing the ordinance of baptilVn into 
quire a different tiling, and by adminifterir.g their new rtte to 
fubjsdls to whom Jefus Clirift never commanded it. It furely 
is a mrprirmj^ thing, and not to be accounted for, but from the 
relics cf human depravity, that fo many good men fhould, 
unknowingly, do and teach things vrhich are quite afi^e from 
what Chrilt hath commanded them. 

It is too late for you, my hearers, to cloak yourfelves under 
what great and good men have faid ; f^T the truth of the Lord 
hath already been told you. Had I not come and fpoken to 
you this word of Chrift, you would not have had fm ; but 
now have you no cloak for difobedience. 
We now come — 

Lafily^ To confider Chrift*s comforting and ftrengihening 
prorr.ife to liis miniftering fervant^; : which is. And, To, I am 
with you alway, even unto the end of the world. 

Chrift J;;fus hath been with his miniilers ; and he will be — 

1. In preparing them for their office. He was perfon 
ally with his fir ft gofpel heralds, for the fpace of ihree years, oi 
more ; after tliis he left them for a fhort time ; in this (hort 
interval they paffed a fevere trial. He was with them again, 
at limes, for forty days. Soon after this he fent his Spirit 
upon them, and filled them with it to a remarkable degree. 
Then they were prepared for their cffire. They fpeedlly filled 
it remarkably, and the effe6l was wonderful. Three ihoufand 
were convened in a day. 

Chrift is as really, though not fo apparently, with all his gof- 
pel mefTengers, in preparing them to go forth into his harveft. 
Thofe, who have not Chrift with them, to prepare them for their 
office, are but as wolves in iheep's clothmg, when they go forth 
into the miniftiy. They preach (orjlhhy herd and frequently 
have their reward. It is too often the cafe, that thofe, whom 
Chrift hath prepared, are obliged to go into ihe field, or make 

aents for their fupport, whilft fuch as run, not being lent, Avim 
_ n luxury. 

2. Jefas Chrift will be with his minifters in bringing divine 
things to their remembrance. 

It is the Lord's Spirit which caufeth divine truth to occur to 
the minds of his fervants. Truths, which have been forgotten 
for months, and it may be for years, or paftages which before 
were underftood, may be, and not unfrequently are, frefti and 

G 



I 



7^ The Mode and SubjeBs [Serni. VII. 

plain m the minds of his fervants, for their comfort, or for the 
comfort and inttrudion of others, or for the comfort and ed- 
ification of both* 

3. Ghrift will be witli his minifters in affording them wif- 
dom, fortitude, and faithfulnefs. 

The entrance of his word givtth light. He maketh light 
their paths, and ordereth all their fteps. He maketh their feet 
like hinds' feet, and caufeth them to be fwifter than the eagle, 
ftronger than lions, wife as ferpents, and harmlefs as doves, 
With what wifdom did Stephen fpeak ! With what fortitude 
did Peter, Paul, and a thoufand others, addrefs their audito- 
ries ! With what wifdom hath he made his fen/ants to fpeak { 
With whac fortitude to bear, with what faithfulnefs to endure, 
for his name's fake ! How remarkably hath it been thus, in 
times of perfecution 1 And when will you find a time, when 
they that are born after the flefh do not perfecute thofe who 
are born after the Spirit ! How often is it the cafe, when min- 
ifters, like Paul, wax bold, and teftify that Jefus is the Chrift, 
and what are his words and inftitutions,- that they are perfecu- 
ted, openly or more fecretly ! 

4. Chrift is and will be with his miniftering fervants whilft 
they are reproached and fuffering for his na.r.e and truth's 
fake. 

He fays to them all, If the world hate ycu, ye know diat it ha- 
ted me before it hated you. When Chrift*s minifters are reviled 
and fuffer for his fake, his truth and Spirit bear their fpirits 
up. He gives them to believe and know, that though they 
weep new, they (hall foon rejoice ; that their light amidlions, 
-which are but for a moment, are preparing tliem for and work- 
ing out for them, a far more exceeding arid an eternal weight 
of glory. 

5. Chrift Jefus will be with his faithful minifters in giving 
them to fee their defire upon his enemies. 

This appears to be particularly implied in my text. They 
are commanded to go and difciple all nations, Their defire 
is to fee dilciples mutiplied. They go forth, Chrift jrces forth 
with them. Many of Chrift's enemies fubmit to his yoke, 
•which is eafy, and to his burden, which is light. In this are 
they gratified, and their defire on them is accomplished. 

6 Cl.rift is with his minifters in explaining and defefiding 
his truth. 

How did Peter, Paul and others, in the fir ft ages of Chrift 
tjiajlity, explain and vindicate the truth, to the confoundirg of 



Serm. VII.] g/ Baptifm. 7^ 

both Jews and GenViles I Whenever, in ages fince, he hath 
Jpoken the word, great hath been the company, or force, of 
thofe who have publiiKed, explained and defended it. Martin 
Luther, John Calvin, and a number more in the reformation, 
were hke flames of fire: noihing could ftop them from publirtiing, 
explaining siud defending the truths of the Saviour, for he' was 
with them. 

You will afk, How is It that Chrift is with his minifters, 
when they contradift one the other, and themfelves too? 
Atif<u)er. It is not faid, that Chrift is with his minilters in ex- 
plaining and defending error. Error is human ; truth is 
divine. When minifters undertake to fiipport error, they go 
without Chrift's bleffing and prefenee in this their labour. 
Hence it is that they are fo contradlAory and inconfiftent; and 
are obliged to wreft the fcriptures from their plain and eafy i^vSt^ 
to fupport a beloved prejudice- But when they take up for 
truth, plain fcripture fupports them, and they have plain and 
pleafant work, and their fubjedls fupported with eafe, as you have 
feen whilft attending to the ieveral truths in my text. 

Beddes, it may be the cafe, that ibme very good men may 
snix truth and error, the commands of Grod and their own tradi- 
tions, together ; and, whilft pra<aifing accordingly, they may 
enjoy a comfortable franae of mind, and hence conclude that 
^eir beloved compound is all from heaven. This ijiay be il- 
J\l.ftratjed by the following example. Mr. S. finds it to be« 
truth, that his infant offspring, as well as every thing elfe, 
Ihould be devoutly given to God.. He hath received and holds 
^ tradition from the fathers, that his infants fhould be baptized. 
He publickly gives them to the Lord, and f^iemnly promifes 
to inftrudt them in the way of truth and dury. He, at the 
ikn^e time h?ith the ordinance of baptifm adminiftered to then^, 
j or adminifters it himfelf. Ehiring the whole tt-anfa<aion he pof- 
"» feffes much comfort in his mind. His confequence is, the 
whol,e matter is according to truth, juft as God would have it. ' 
Is not this going ^ little too much by fenfe, and not quite e- 
iiough by fcripture ? Does it not contain 2if0ce of enthvifiafip > 
, ^^ Would not the good man i}av€ had the fame mental fati;5fa<aion, 
I ft;;Jtiad he pofleffed the fame fpirituality, and yet had omitted that 
part which is enjoined by tradition only \ 

Lajlly : The gre.^t Captain of Salvation is with his mioii^ 
t^rs, to teach, lead and comfort them, in all their trials, in aJl 
their ftraits. Whofoever will leave them, he will not. Thougl^ 
lie, the Gr£/it-^gh frieft pf cmr profcflipn, when fuffering for 



76 The Mode and Suhjs^ls [SeriHV VIL 

his people*s fin", was left aIon2 — all forsook him ; yet, whea- 
ever his friends are afHi<5led, he kindly chills, faying, Lo, I am 
with yru. This h^th been the (lay of good men in all ages, in 
ail chcumftances. Thofewho have wandered aboutin iheep ikins 
;ind goat-fkins, who have been afflicted, tormented, of whom 
the world was not worthy, have fouid their refuge here. There 
is nothing like this to fupport the feeble, diiireiTed foul. When 
godly minifteTS have been obliged to leave their people, ye.% 
and their families, and fometimes their native country, for the 
truth's fake, this hath fuftdined them — Chrift was with them. 
Prefident Edwards, for a noble attempt at partial reformation, 
was conftrained to flee his beloved charge ; but Chrift was, no 
dcubt, with him. Should I, for laying the axe at the root of the 
irie, be obliged to leave you, though, for the prefent I fee 
no particular reafon to apprehend fuch an event, yet I truft 
this v^iil be my hiding place Jtfus, who will be with me. 

APPLICATION. 

FROM what hath been faid in the preceding difcourfes, it 
appears — 

1. That the two fides of the controverfy between the Bap* 
lifts and the Pedobaptifts ftand thus. 

Before I ftate the two fides of the controverfy, it is but rea- 
fcnable that I define thcfe whom it refpedls. By the Baptifts, 
on one fide, 1 mean the regular Calviniftic Baptifts. By the 
Pedobaptifts on the other, I now Intend the Calviniftic Congre- 
gationalifts among them. I give this definition, that I may be 
clearly underftcod. 

You fee both fides are Calvlnifts, that is, they are agreed in 
what are ftyled the doctrines of grace. They are both of the 
congregational order, as it refpefts the government of the 
churches. 

New for the controverfy— and it is this : The Baptifts hold 
immerfion only to be baptifm. The Pedobaptifts hold that 
fprinkling may be fubftituted for immerfion, and may anfwer 
juft as well. 

The Baptifts hold that the fcriptures know nothing of a Chrif- 
tian ordinance of baptifm for unbelievers and infidels. The 
Pedobaptifts hold that, if a great man, who hath a thoufand 
flaves, ihould become a difciple, then all his houfehoid are to 
be counted difciples, and are to be baptized. 

The Baptifts hold that the church of the New-Teftament is 



! §pvm. VII.| ofBaptifm. 77 

<:ompofed of vlMe or prof efTsd faimts. The confident Pedo« 
baptiifts hold, that this great man, his thoufand fl;iyes, together 
with his wife and qhilclren, all belong to the gofpel church, 
though he only be a believer in Chrift. 

The Baptifts hold that none have a right to partake of the 
ford's Supper but thofe who are his friends. The confiftent 
Pedobaptifts hold, that ^11 thp adults in this great man's houfe- 
hold, if they t}^ not guiUy of grofs immorality, have a right 
to come. 

The Baptifts plead New-Teftament authority for the defence 
qf their principles and pradice, where ihey differ from their 
hireihren of ihe Pedobaptii^s. The Pedobaprifts in fupport of 
their fentiments plead convenience, and the covenant and rite of 
prcunieifion, which were decaying, waxing old, and ready to 
vanifh away, more than 1 700 years ago. 

The Baptifts bring nighly threefcore texts of fcripture, which 
a^e plainly ^nd fully to their point in favour of immerfion. 
The Pedob^ptifts mention three or four texts, which, at moft^ 
^e but ve/y doubtfully in their favour ; and, when rightly un- 
derftood, 3ppe^r fully again ft them. 

What advantage, my brethren, have the Pedobaptifts over the 
!^iptifts ? And wiih:what crime or error, in this matter do they, 
ftand convicted ?; 

2. It appears that gofpel mii)i(lers have no authority to 
t$ach Chriftians, that their children and fervants fhould be bap- 
tized, becaufe Abraham's were circumcifed. 

Chrift hath no where commanded them to teach thus* 
Chrift hath no where commanded tliem to teach infant baptifm 
a^t all, or baptifm upon the faith of another ; much lefs, that 
tjiey are to be baptized becaufe Abraham's were circumcifed. 

3. It appears, that many of the pious and learned clergy of 
New-England have made fome noble and pFomifing advances 
towards truth in this matter ; yet in this they are inconfiftent 
with themfelves. 

They will receive none to the communion but fuch as pro- 
fefs faith in our Lord Jefus Chrift, as well as repentance for fm ; 
^nd they will adrainifter baptifm to the children of no other. 
Bere, in two inftances, they refufe to follow the law of circum- 
cifion. One, in refafmg to admit to the fupper, impenitent, 
tj^pugh civil, b.iptized perfons 5 the other^ in not admitting to 
b^ptiim the children of all thofe who haye been baptized* This > 
i> confiftent witJi truth fo far as it goes ; but inconfiftent with - 
G, 2 



78 The Mode and Subjefls [Serm. VII. 

the notion that the fubje<5ls of baptlfm are to be determined 
from the rubje<5ts of circumcifion. 

Thefe good men, fo long as they ;i» fTefs their prefent light, 
mild come over to the true Baptlft ground, or fubmit to the 
imputation of inconfiftency. I wiih them to come over. For 
myfelf, I expedt to, though my carnal nature hates the name of 
a Baptift as much as theirs does. But my better judgment 
tells me, that the Baptifts are on the s^ofpel ground. 

4. It is a matter of lamentation, that pious and learned min- 
ifters have not a little mere lelf denial ; then they might be con-* 
fiflent with themfelves, and with truth too. Could I be with 
them, and afk them this plain queftion, Do you not find a little 
backwardnefs from fearching critically into the primitive mean- 
ing and pradlce of baptifm ? 1 f^ar they would anfwer with 
fome reludance. 

To me, I confefs, it appears an hard cafe, that the Baptifts 
fhould fuffer fo much reproach, merely on account of their fen- 
timenrs, when many of our beft old divines have given them the 
ground, and confeff^d that their fentiments, as to the mode, 
are from heaven, and ours from convenience. Our oppofition 
to them, on account of the fubjedls, appears but little better, 
being but poorly fupported by fcripture : they having the plain 
word, and full current of all the prophets from Mofes to Ma!a- 
chi, fo far as they have fpoken of the gofpel church, together 
with the New-Tedament in their favour ; whilft for us. in this 
particular, nothing belter can be alleged than the antiquated 
rite of circumcUion. if the Baptifts be right, why not join 
them, and fuffer fmall inconveniences ? If wrong, why not 
prove them fo ? It is pitiful that great and good irien fiiould be 
dallying with inconclufive arguments, w^hen the time is long 
fmce come, that the highivay of holinefs fhould be fo plain^ that 
wayfaring men, tliough fools, Ihould not err therein. 

5. We fee why good men have been fo divided among them- 
felves, as to infant bapiifm. 

The reafon is, they go without Chrift in this matter. He is 
not divided. 

Some baptize all. Others will baptize only the children in 
the houfeholds of communicants. Some baptize upon the 
half-way covenant. Some will baptize all who are under age. 
Again, others will baptize all under feven. Others ftill will 
baptize upon the good promifes of godfathers and godmothers. 
You will obfarve I ufe the word baptize in a {Mq which I be- 
lieve to be improper, but I would not oiFend you with a word» 



Serm. VII.] of Baptifm. 79 

when my meaning may be underftood. Bat what propritty is 
there in all this ineonfiikncy about the fubjedls of baptifm ? 
Does not the matter look as though there was no rule to go by, 
or as though none uLderflood what it vi as ? 

6. We fee v* hy good men, when writing or fpeaking of 
baptifm, are left to fpeak untruths. 

It is doubtlefs becaufe they will follow their own prejudices, 
and not the truth. Error hath divided them, and Chriil is not 
with them in what they fay. Some good men, not many, dare 
aflert, in oppofuion to the Baptifts, that there is not a word a- 
bout immeriion for baptifm, in all the Bib'e. For laymen to fay 
thus, is prefumption, and for m^n of learning to make the afler- 
tion, is almo/i unpardonable. For they knov/, or. ought to know, 
that the word to baptize, is not once m.entioned in all the Bi- 
ble but immerfion is mentioned, unlefs they mean to p'ay upon 
the word ; and then it is a truth, when baptizo is mentioned im- 
merfion is, if they will give it its plain, literal EngHlh. 

If the Baptifts have the plain, literal and unequivocal fenfe 
of the fcripture in their favour, is it not enough that they are 
defpifed and perfecuted by the wicked of every clafs and not 
helped by any ; but mufl we add to iheir affl (ftion, by falfe- 
hood or equivocation ? O prejudice ! what wilt thou not do, 
even in a faint ! 

Befides, our good brethren, who are fo warm againft the 
Baptiftg, and will not allow them a word for their mode, do noc 
agree together to inform us what the mode (hould be. One 
tells us, it is fprinkling, another fays, pouring is the mode, a 
third contends for walhing the face, a fourth is for putting wa- 
ter on the back of the neck, as the Swifs are faid to do ; whilft 
others affirm, that all ihefe are right. Now, fuppcife the Bap- 
tifts are wrong, who (hall we fay are in the right, or ii, there 
no right in this bufmefs ? Does not all this look juft as it would 
were there an error at the bottom ? Hath the great i eacher 
who came from God, left matters thus at loofe ends ? Does 
the Bible thus differ, whilft pointing out the rx*ode ? No. Its 
language is pure and determinate. 

7. It appears, that, in infant fprinkling for baptifm, the in- 
tent cf the inllitution is loft, and becomes no Chriftian ordinance 
at all. 

Both the thing itfelf and the fubjeds of it are changed. It 
is quite a different thing from what the InRitutor hath appoint- 
ed. Neither this mode nor thefe fubj-^ds are known in the in- 
flitution, nor in any paffage of the Bible, where baptifm is 



%g The Mod^ ai%4 Subjeds [Serm. VIL 

mentioned. This mqde is of man's device, and the fuhje(5l3 of 
it l^aye, at beft, blit a traditional right. For good men tQ 4q 
thus, whilft they think it coafiilent witli truth, appears to h? a 
fin of ignorance ; but if any do thus, while they kpow what 
the fcriptures enjoin, their pra(5lice deferves a harder name. 

8. it appears that dipping, imniprlion, or burying in tJ^e 
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghqft, is 
baptifm. 

No man of real piety and folid learning ev^ ^Ipubt^d it. 
"Vyhcreas, fprinkling hath been doubted by many, denied cpn- 
tipually by a large clafs of Chriftians, and i>een prqyed by 
none to have been ever appointed as the Cl^riftian ordinance of 
baptifm. 

9. We fee, that every ple% which hath been made, fpr a 
g;eneral or partial negted of the fcripture mode of baptifm, is 
an indired though unintentional charge of negligence, or want 
of benevolence, or of fprefight, in the Divine Inftitutpr. Let 
every man of candour and common fenfe exjimjne this matter. 
Did r^pt the Lord, who n?iade our nprthern clim^., knqw hpw 
epld they are ? — Did he knp>y them tp be too cold for liis dif- 
ciples who might live in them, to be feparated fiom the W^P^^tJ 
by being vifibly buried and raifed again to join his kingdom ^• 
Why then did he not mention an exception in our favoui;-, an^ 
not leaye us to fuffer this inconvenience, or be in perpetual un- 
certainty and continual difpute, to defend ou^, ^t beft, h\it 
doi^btful pradtlce ? Did he not perfe<5lly know all the cotrtpelling 
nece/fttles which Cyprian and others would, in their erring judg- 
ments, find to break over the bounds of the baptifmal inftitu- 
tion ? Why then did he make no provifion fc^ thefe extreme 
cafes ? By doing this, he would have faved the Pedobaptifts a 
world of anxiety, contention and cenfure. The fa€^ appears to 
be, that our Lord intended, tliat the way of admifHon into h,i^ 
kingdom fliould be uniform, and that thofe who would not fub- 
mit to it, fhould fuifer the inconvenience of darknefs, error and 
ttrife. 

10. From what hath been faid :n the preceding difcourfes, 
Is not the following a fair and undeniable concl^ifion ? That I 
and other Pedobaptift minifters^ fo far as we have fpok^n a 
word againft the Baptifts, and efpecially that thofe, who have 
pubiickly warned their people to avoid the Baptifts and %e 
from them, as from a dividing and dangerous herefy, have ii?i - 
this matter a6led the part of the old Scribes, Phanfees/hypQ»r 
crites— who would not go into the kingdom of Go^ themfelxV^ 
aad Uiofe who were envering, they hindered. 



Serm. VII.] of Baptifm. 81 

I by no means fuppofe that all who have done thus, are In- 
deed hypocrites, fave in thik particular. No reafonable doubt 
can be entertained, but many of them are learned, pious, and 
very ufeful men ; men, whom the Lord hath greatly honoured 
as labourers, in gathering in the harveil of fouls. Many of 
ihefe have been, in meafure, bold, zealous and faithful, like 
Peter ; yet when they diffimble, or teach and pradlife contrary 
from the truth, they are to be blamed ; yes, they are, in this 
inflance, worthy to be rebuked. 

It would, indeed, be very injudicious in me to contend that all 
which the Baptifts have faid and done isjuftifiable. It would 
be equally injudicious to juflify myfelf, or my brethren, where 
we have both faid and done things contrary from the church 
and name of Jefus of Nazareth. It is time for both minifters 
and people to look to tliis matter, left the Lord fend leannefs 
into our fouls. 

1 1. From a review of the whole fabje(51:, the fjllowing in- 
ference appears natural, and at the f;ime time worthy of much 
corfideration. The divniely conftituted method by which any 
of the fallen race are to enter the kingdom of heaven below, re- 
markably fets to our view the way by which we are to com- 
mence perfedl: members of the kingdom of heaven above. Our 
obedience to the former is a pradical tJeclaration of our faith in 
the latter. 

In joining Chrift's kingdom on earth, we profefledly die un- 
to fin, go down to the grave, are buried, and rife, as from the 
dead. To join the kingdom of glory, we mufl adlually expe- 
rience what is but fhadowed forth in biptifm. We muft die, 
be buried, or return to theduft, and rife from the dead. 

How exactly doth our entrance into the church militant iLad- 
cw forth our hoped for entrance into the church tiiumphant! 
It alfo appears that Chrift hath direded, that the fu^jefls of 
the one (hould be profefledly, what the fubjt<5ts of the other 
fhall be a<5lually, all faints. 

Hov/ beautiful doth the church appear, fo far as flieobferves 
the commands of her Lord, at to the members which fhe ad- 
■toits, and the manner of receiving them ! She thus refembles 
; Jerufalem, which is above, which is the mother of us all, if we 
»e Chriftiars. May the Lord direft our hearts into the love 
)f the truth. 

In the conclufion of the whole. It becomes us to add, to the 
bruths delivered, what Chriil Jefus added to my text : A m f n> 

EUD OF "THE SERMONS. 



A MINIATURE HISTORt 



OF THE 

BAPTISTS. 



IT may be phafing to fome of my readers to be prefent- 
ed with a brief acco>jnt of the Baptifts. I fh^ll ex,tra<5l 
this account from the writings of thofe who were not of thjc 
Baptift denomination, but rather prejudiced againft them. 

Here it may be obferved, that the religious fe<S, called 
Baptifts, have caufed the learned world more perplexity and 
refearch to decypher their origin, than any other fe6t of Chrif- 
tians, or, perhaps, than all others. Yes,, this refearch hath 
baffled all their erudition in ancient ftory. 

It is not difficult to fix the period when one fed of this 
denomination was firft called Petrobrufians, when another was 
known by the name of Waterlan.dians, when a third was de- 
nominated Mennonites, &c. But the difficulty is this, to afc^r- 
tain the time, place and medium^ l>y which Chrift*s difcipl^ 
were led to adopt the peculiar fentiment, which is now held by 
thofe called Baptifts, and which diftinguifhes them from all 
other denominations. 

It may be farther obferved, that if no ojje, however learned 
and wife, bg able to tTa.ce this fe<n: to any beginning f]iort of the 
days of the apoftles, orof Chrift, it is poffible that it then ^iroije. 
B fides, if all other religious denominations, or the Pedobaptifts, 
who include all which are not Baptifts, can be traced to a prob- 
able origin fhort of the apoftles, and the Baptifts cannot ^e, i,t 
affords ftill more probability, that tji.ey might have arifen thei?. 

t wifh my readers to indulge mp i)ti one queftion, and to giye 
me an explicit anfwer. Are you willing to have the origin of 
the Baptifts fairly explored, aiad to open your eyes to the light, 
ijipuld light be riftl^rded ? 

You cannot, njy Chriftian readers, unlefs your minds be un- 
duly fwayed by prejudice, dp otherwife than fay, Yes. For, 
though you be not very friendly to the Baptifts, you will not 
deny them what you grant to your worft enemy, liberty to fpe^|s 
the truth, and that truth its weight, at leaft in meafure. 

It ought to be particularly noted, that my objed is not to 
give the hiftory of a name, but of a principle. I ftiall not con- 



A MINIATURE HISTORY, ^C. ^3 

t«nd who t^ere firfl called Baptifts, Ariabaptifts, Mennonltes, or 
the like ; but who have held the peculiar fentiment which is 
adopted by thofe who are called BaptiAs. Wherever we find 
this principle, there we find the men, the Chriftians, who, had 
they lived in our day, would be ftyled Baptifts. Nor is the 
ptefent controverfy this, Whence came that mode of baptifm, 
t^rhich is praftifed by all, who are known by the name Baptifts ? 
For this mode is granted, generally, if not univerfally, by all 
learned and honeft men, to be as ancient as John the Baptift 
and the apoftles. This mode is, indeed, not peculiar to the 
Baptifts, for the Pedobaptifts, for many centuries, pra(fiifed this 
mode ; and many of them do, to this day, pradife immerfion. 
The peculiar chara<5^eriftic of the Baptifts is this : They hold, 
that the ordinance of baptifm is to be adniiniftered to adults or 
to vifible believers only. 

One natural confequence (^ this principle is, when any one 
ijfho was baptized, or fprinkled, in his infancy, comes over to 
the Baptifts' fentiment, they require him to be baptized. 
Hence they are called Anabaptifts. Another very natural 
confequence is, this fentiment conftralns the Baptifts to oppofe 
the baptifm of infants. Hence they are diftinguifhed by the 
jiarae of Antipedobaptifts. 

I {hall add one obfervation more, and then proceed to give 

. you a fuccin^} hiftory of the Baptifts. The obfervation is this : 

Whenever and wherever I find pierfons, who hold the peculiar 

charadteriftic fentiment of the Baptifts, I ftiall call them by 

that name. Their hiftory now follows. 

L The origin of the Baptifts can be found no where, unlefs 
it be conceded tliat it was at Jordan, or Enon. 

Dr. Moftieini, in his hiftory of the Baptifts, fays, *< The true 
origin of that fe<5t, which acquired the denomination of the An- 
a'baptift's by tb^r adminiftering anew the rite of baptifm to 
thofe who come over to their cbinmunion, and derived that of 
Mennonites from the fanious man to whom they owe the great- 
eft part of their prefent felicity, is/jUiri the remote depths oi antiq- 
uity, and is of confequence extremely difficult to be afcertained.*' 
Here Dr. Molheim, as learned an hiftorian, though not fo 
candid a one, as the fcience of letters can boaft, beairs poficive 
teftimohy, that the origin of the Baptifts is hidden in the /v- 
mote' depths of antiquity. Nothing is more evident than this ; the 
Dodlor either knew not their origin, or was not candid endugh 
to confefs it. At leaft, we have this conclufioni thkt he could 
•find their origin no where fhort of the apoftles* 



84 A MINIATURE HISTORY 

II. A large FiUmber of the EaptlHs were fcattered, oppref- 
fed, and perricuted, through many, if rot through all, the ra- 
tioFiS of Europe, before the dawn rf the reformaiion under Lu- 
ther and Calvin. When Luther, feccnded by feveral princes cf 
the petty ftates cf Germany, arcfe in cppcfition to the over- 
grown ufurpatlons of the church of Rome, the Baptifts alfo 
arofe from their hiding places. They hoped that vliat they 
ha^ been long expefting and prayirc: for was now at the door ; 
the time in which the fufFv^rings of God's people fhould be 
greatly terminated : hut God had not raifed Luther's views of 
reformation to nigh the height the Baptifts v:ere expe<5ling. 
Their deteftaiion of the Mother of Harlots, owing to their bit- 
ter experience of her cruelties, and ihe clear gofpel light with 
which they had been favoured above Luther, and their ardent 
defire to be utterly delivered from her cruel oppreflions, made 
them v.'iih to carry the reformation farther than G'^d had ap- 
pointed Luther to sccomplifh. They were foon difappointed 
in Luther, and probably did not duly appreciate the reforma- 
tion which he was ir.ilrum.entally effe<5ling. It was as might 
have been expeded ; the Lutherans and the Baptifts fell out 
by the vray ; and Calvin, if not Luther, warmly oppofed them. 
.S"^^ Mrjheim, Cent, XV i. Chap. iii. SeB. 3. Pari 2> 

Molheim, vol. IV. page 427, fpeaklng of the Baptifts, fays, 
"This fed ftarted up all of a fudden, in feveral countries, at 
the fame point of time, and at the very period when the firft con- 
tefts of the reformers with the Roman PontiiFs drew the atten- 
tion of the world." 

From this we have one plain and fair dedudlon ; that the Bap- 
tlfts were before the reformation under Luther and Calvin, and 
therefore did not take their rife from the enthufiafts under Mun- 
zer and Storck, or at that time ; or at Munfler. 

III. The Huiiltes, in the fifteenth century, the Wickliffites, 
in the fourteenth, and the Petrobrufians, in the twelfth, and the 
Waldenfes, were all Bapiifts.* To this fad Dr. Mt fheim bears 
the following teftimony.-t" *' ^^ "^*^y ^'^ obferved that the Msn- 
nonites (i. e. the Baptifts ofEaft aud Weft Friefland, Holland, 
Gelderland, Brabant, V/eftphalia, and other places in the North 
of Europe) are not entirely mtjlaken^ when they boaft their de- 
fcent from the Waldenfes, Petrobrufian?, and other ancient feds, 
who are ufnally confidered as ivitnejfes of the truth in times of 

* Not all, every one ; but all, generally. 
t Vd, IV. pp, 4^8, 429. 



' OF TH£ BAPTISTS. 35 

Tiniverul darknefs and fuperllition. Before the rife of Luther 
and Calvin, there lay concealed in almoj} all the countries of Eu- 
rope, particularly in Bohemia, Moravia, Switzerland and Ger- 
many, many perfons, who adhered tenacioufly to the following 
doarine, which the Waldenfes, Wickliffites and Huffites had 
maintained ; fome in a more difguifed and others in a more 
open and public manner, viz. That the kingdom of Chrj/If or the 
vi/ible church he had ejlabiipjed upon earth, luas an ajfemhly of true 
4ind real faints, and ought therefore to be macceffihle to the w'lched and 
unrighteous, and aifo exempt from all thofe injitutions nvhich human 
prudence fuggefls to oppofe the progrefs of iniquity , or to correB and 
reform tranfgreffors. This maxim is the true fource of all the 
peculiarities, that are to be found in the religious doctrine and 
difcipline of the Mennonites, (or Baptifts in the North of Eu- 
rope) and it is moft certain that \h^ greatefl part o£ theic peculi- 
arities were approved of by many of thofe who, before the dawn 
of the reformation, entertained the notion already mentioned 
relating to the vifible church of Chrift." 

From this teftimony of Dr. Moflieim we may remark — 

1. That the Mennonites were Baptifts, or Anabaptifts, for 
thcfe different names he ufes to exprefs one and the fame thing. 

2. That the Petrobrufians were Baptifts ; for the Baptifts 
affert* and Mofheim allows it, that they were iheir progenitors 
in principle and practice. Befides, in his hiftory of the twelfth 
century, part II. chap. v. fe<fl. 7, he exprefsly tells us, that one 
of their tenets was, that no perfons ivhaffoe'ver 'were to be lapti%td 
before they ivere come to the full ufe of their reafcn- 

3. That the Waldenfes, Wickliffites and Huffites were Bap- 
tifts ; for, as Mofheim fays, they all held to the great and lead- 
ing maxim, which is the true fource of all the peculiarities that 
are to be found in the religious doctrine and difcipline of the 
Mennonites. Thefe feveral denominations of Chriftians were 
not known by the ancient, modern and appropriate name, Bap- 
tifts. But their dodrine and difcipline were the fame with our 
Baptifts, and were they now living, they would be thus called. 
In other words ; juft fo far as they were confiftent with their 
great and leading maxim, and juft fo far as the modern Baptifts 
are confiftent with their great and leading maxim, juft fo far 
thefe ancient and modern Baptifts are alike the one to the other. 

, 4. That in the fixteenth century the Waldenfes, Petrobru- 
fians and other ancient feds (i. e. of the Baptifls) were ufually 
confidered as having been witneffes of the truth, in the times of 
H 



86 A MINIATURE HISTOfiV 

darVnefs and univerfal funernition. How differently from tlits 
would and do many confider them in our day . 

T That before the rife of Luther and Calvm, there lay con- 
ceded inalmoa all the countries of Europe, particularly mBo- 
hernia Moravia, Switzerland and Germany, many perfons who 
heU the fame doarine and difcipline witlr the B.pt.fts m our 
day, and were, of neceffary and fair confequence. of the fame 
denomination. ^^^ already traced the Baptias.down to the 
twelfth century. We have a)fo found that they were fcattered 
ov r Smoft all the countries of turope and were, m tfte dark 
ages of popery, the witneffes of the truth , or have been ufually 
thu confidered. Befides, we have found that .he Waldenfes 
lere. in principle and praflice, Baptifts ; or ^^o^^^-'ff' 
we have found that the Waldenfes were Bapt.ft.. We w.11 
^„™ r,,. to what origin we can trace the Waldenles. 
""Sn m" lline! l^l tranflated Mofheim's chttrch htftory from 

"V&^t ^oCifSC/of tHe"«enfel' H^i's ^^ ^s 
:°e .?W may vent"le to affirm the contrary (i. e. from what 
Molheim h^d jua faid of the Waldenfes takmg thetr name from 
PewrWaldus-') with Beza and other wr.ters of note , for t 
i-eter "':""" ^. , . ^ records, that Valdus derived his 
^"Te ZttJtZwMell of Piedmont, whofe doftrine lie 
^Ztet and whrJcre known by the name of Van ois and 
viddenfes l>efore he or his immediate followers ex.iled. Ii 
l^^ur.rpr or Waldenfes, had derived their name from any 
*'JleaSerit would Pi^^ have been from Valdo, who 
Z emXu^'fo; the parity of lis ^'oarine 'n the r.^^ 

?hT;'aUil n P eto* t ;hich in 'their language are called 



6F THE BAPTISTS. 



8-7 



mentions authors of note, who make their antiquity remount to 
the apoftohc age. See the account given of Sacco's hook by the 
Jeju'it Gretfer in. the Bibliotheca Patrum. I know not upon^ 
what principle Dr. Molheim maintains that the inhabitants ot 
the vallies of Piedmont are to be carefully diftinguKhed from 
the Waldenfes; and I am perfuaded that whoever will be at 
the pains to read attentively the 2d, 25th, 26th, and 27th chap- 
ters of the firft bo(>k of Leger's Hillorie des Eglifes Vaudoifes, 
will find this difiiiKtion entirely groundlefs.— When the Papifts 
alks us where our religion was before Luther, we generally 
anfwer, in the Bible, and we anfwer well. But to gratify their 
tafte for tradition, and human authority, we may add to this 
anfwer — and in the vallies of Piedmont. 

To the above we may add, one of the Poplih writer?, fpeak- 
In,? of the Waldenfes, fays, " The hcrefy of th^ Waldenfes is thz 
sldeji herefy in the luorld.''''^ 

It is here worthy to be particularly noticed— 

1. That Reinerus Sacco fpeaks of the Waldenfes, or Bap* 
tlfts, of his day, as a {ed that had, at that time, flouriflied for 
about five hundred years ; which brings tiie hiftory of the Bap- 
tills, as a religious fe^, down to the fifth century. 

2. That this fame Reinerus Sacco mentions authors of nx)te, 
who make the antiquity of the Waldenfean Briptifts to rsmount 
to the apoflolic age. 

3. That the Baptlfts are the mod ancient of all the relig* 
ious feels, who liave fet themfelves to oppofe the ghoftly pow- 
ers of the Romanifts. 

4.' That if there be any body of ChrilVians, who have ex- 
ifted during the reign of antichrift, or of the man of fin, the 
Baptitls have been this living church of Jefus Chrift. 

5. The confequence of the whole is this : The Baptifts 
have no origin fliort of the Apoftles. They arofe in the days 
of John the Baptift, and increafed largely in the days of our 
bleffed Saviour, when he fhovved himfelf unto Ifrael, and in the 
days of his Apoftles, and have exifted, under the fevered oppref- 
fions, with intervals of profperity, ever fmce. 

But as to the Pedobaptifts, their origin is at once traced to 
about the middle of the fecond century ; when the myftery of 
iniquity not only began to work, but, by Its fermentation, had 
produced this error uf fruitful evils, namely, that baptifm was 
effential to falvation : yes, that it w^as regeneration. Hence 
arofe the neceffity of baptizing children. Now comes forward 

• PrefKfent Edwards's Hift. of Redemption, p. 267. 



8S A MINIATURE HISTORY 

Irenreiis, and informs that the church had a iradit'wn from thf 
/ipoftles to give baptifm to infants. We are told in the Appen- 
dix to MoOieim's Church Hiftory, that one of the remarkable 
things which took phice in the fecond century was the baptiz- 
ing of infants, it being never known before, as a Chriftian or- 
dinance for them. 

What a pity it is, that good men, who have renounced the 
error, which was, as church hiftory informs us, the progenitor 
of infant baptifm, fliould dill retain its pradical and erroneous 
offspring, to the prejudice and marring of the church of God ! 
Not a fmgle fe(5l of the Pedobaptills can find its origin nearer 
to the Apolllesthan the fecond century. We hence conclude, 
that their origin was there, and that they then and there aroie 
in the myftery which was then working. May the Father of 
lights open the eyes of my brethren, that they may come out 
©f this, perhaps, the hill thicket of grofs error and darknefs. 

I will now add — 

V. The teftimony which Prefident Edwards bears in favour 
CI tlie Waldenfes and other faithful ones, who were feattered 
through all parts of Europe in the dark ages of Popery. It is 
the following : 

" In every age of this dark time, there appeared particular 
perfo/»3 in all parts of Chriftendom, who bore a teftimony a- 
^G,ainft the corruptions and tyranny of the church of Rome. 
There is no one age of antichrift, even in the darkeft time of 
all, but ecclefiaftical hiftorians mention a great many by name, 
who manifefted an abhorrence of the Pope and his idolatrous 
worOiip, and plead for the ancient purity of dodlrine and wor- 
iliip. God was pleafed to maintain an uninterrupted fuccef- 
iion of witnefTes, through the whole time, in Germany, France, 
Britain, and other countries, as hillorians demonftrate, and 
mention them by name, and give an account of the teftimony 
which they held. Many of them were private perfons, and 
many of them minifters, and fome magiftrates and perfons of 
great diftin(ftion. And there were numbers in every age, who 
were perfecuted and put to death for this teftimony. 

*• Befides thefe particular perfons, difperfed here and there, 
there was a certain people, called the Waldenfes, who lived fep- 
arate from all the reft of the world, who kept themfelves pure, 
and conftantly bore a teftimony againft the church of Rome, 
through all this dark time. The place where they dwelt was 
the Vaudois, or the five vallies of Piedmont, a very m.ountain- 
ous country, between Italy and France. The place where they 
lived was compafted with thofe exceeding high mountains, call- 



I OF THE BAPTISTS. ^ 

«d the Alps, which were almoft impaflable. The paflage over 
thefe mountainous, defert countries, was fo difficult, that the 
vallies where this people dwelt were almoft inacceffible. There 
this people lived for many ages, as it were alone, where, in a 
ftate of feparation from all the world, having very little to do 
with any other people, they ferved God in the ancient purity 
of his worfliip, and never fubmitted to the church of Rome. 
This place, in this defert, mountainous country, probably was 
the place, efpecially meant in the 1 2th chap, of Rev. 6th 
verfe, as the place prepared of God for the woman, that they 
fhould feed her there during the reign of Antichrift. 

" Some of the Popifhvvriters themfelves ovm that that peo- 
ple never fubmitted to the church of Rome, One of the Pop- 
ifti writers, fpeaking of the Waldenfes, fays, the herefy of the 
Waldenfes is the oldeft herefy in the world. It is fuppofed, 
that this people firft betook themfelves to this defert, fecret place 
among the mountains, to hide themfelves from the feverity o£ 
the heathen perfecutions, which V7ere before Conftantine the 
Great; and thus the woman fled into the wildernefs from the 
face of the ferpent. Rev. xii. 6 ; and fa verfe 14, And to the 
woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that flie might 
fly into the wildernefs into her place, where {he is nouriflied for 
a time and times and half a time from the face of the ferpent^ 
And the people being fettled there, their pofterity. continued 
there from age to age afterv/ards, and being as it were by nat- 
ural walls, as well as by God's grace, feparated from the reft of 
the world, never partook of the overflowing corruption." 

It is hoped that the reader will, very carefully and candidly 
compare what is teftified to us by three v^ry learned men, Dr. 
Molheim, Dr. Machine, and Frefident Edwards-. The tefti^ 
mony of the firft is, that the Waldenfes and many others who 
are ufually conftd^red as tuttnefes of the truth in the times oi'univer* 
Jal darknefs ^,nd Juperjitton, were. elTentially agreed with the Bapr 
tifts of modern date, as to principle and pradice, or as to the 
great maxim, whence flow ail the peculiarities of that denomi- 
nation. His teftmiony, in lliort. is this ; the Huffites, the 
Wickliffites, the Petrobrufians, and the Waldenfes, with other 
witnefles of the truth, feathered over liurope, in the dark ages 
of Popery, were effentially the fame with the Baptifts of latec 
times ; or that they all were what we call Baptifts. 

Dr. Machine teftifies that the Waldenfei> flourlflied as early 
as the fifth century; yes, he informs us that fome authors of 
note carry their antiquity up to the aooftolic age, 
H 2 



so A MINIATURE HISTORY 

Prefident Edwards informs us that thefe Waldenfes were 
the main body of the church in the dark ages, and have been, 
together with their fcattered brethren, the pure church of Jefus 
Chrift, during the reign of Antichrift, and, of certain confe- 
quence, were fucceflbrs of the pure church, from the days of 
Chrift and his apoftles. 

The fair confequence of all is this, that the Baptifts have been 
the uninterrupted church of our Lord f>om the apoftles' day 
to ours. 

I may, indeed, exclaim, What have 1 been believing, what 
have I been doing, with refpecl to the Baptifts, all my days ? 

I know, and I confefs, thai the hiftory of the church aflures 
me, that the denomination of Chriftians to which I have belong- 
ed, and to which 1 do ftill vifibiy belong, came through the 
church of Rome, and was broken off from the mother of har- 
lots, and it is not greatly to be wondered at, if all her filth 
fliould not be yet wiped away. At the fame time, the fame 
hiftory aflures me, that the Baptifts never have fubmitted to 
lier fuperftitions and filthy abominations. 

I am fomewhat furprifed at my own long continued igno- 
rance, and at the yet remaining darknefs of my brethren, as 
to this matter. But above all, what fhall I fay, at the hard 
oppofition which fome good men yet maintain againft their 
brethren, the Baptifts ? Surely they might witli great propri- 
ety be addrefled in the words of Gamaliel : ** Take heed to 
yourfelves what ye intend to do, as touching thefe men." If 
ye will not favour them, *< refrain from them, and let them 
alone ; for if their counfel or work be of men, it will come to 
nought ; but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it ; left 
haply ye be found even to fight againft God." 

All the power, craft, and cruelty of the wicked, though 
pradifed for nighly one thoufand eight hundred years, have 
not been able to prevail againft them. Surely the mifguided 
zeal of good men will not. 

In this fhort Hiftory of the Baptifts, we fee the continued 
accomplifhment of one of Chrift*s promifl'ory prediftions, 
which is, Matt. xvi. 18. The gates of hell Ihall not prevail 
againft the church. That denomination of Chriftians which 
are called Baptifts, are the only known fociety of profeffing 
Chriftians, agamft which Satan hath not prevailed, either in 
point of dodrine, or difciphne, or both. This church, or old 
and inveterate herefy, as Satan would call it, he acknoi/ledges, 



OF THE BAPTISTS- 91 

. by the mouth of his fervants, the Romanifts, that he could 
never fubdue. It is true, Satan Iiath joined many of his legion^ 
to it, as he did many falfe brethren to the difciples in the days 
of the apoftles. But he hat)i never, no, not for an hour, pre- 
vailed upon this ancient and primitive church to give up the 
dodrines of grace, or the adminiftrations of the ordinances as 
Chrift delivered them to his people. That which Ihe firft re- 
ceived, Ihe ftill holds faft, and will. In all the hiftory of the 
church, we read of no other body of profefling Chriftians, after 
which Satan haih caft fuch a continual flood of waters ; but 
Jiitherto the earth hath helped the woman, and the flood of 
perfecution hath not prevailed. Satan's future efforts will be 
equally without effeift. 

My Fathers and Brethren in the miniftry, and my brethren 
among the profeffed difciples of the Lord Jefus Chrift, fuffer a 
word of exhortation. 

If you will not take up the crofs, and fo increafe the num- 
ber of Chrift's continually preferved, yet always fuffering, little 
flock, be ye careful how ye fet yourfelves in array againft them ; 
for more are they who are for them, than are thofe who are 
againft them. With you is an arm of flefli, in all your oppo- 
fitions, but with them is the Lord their God to help them, 
and he will help them ; and by and by he will help them 
right early. 

I fhall be very pleafingly difappointed, fhould I not be, by 
many of you who are rulers in Ifrael, fet at nought, for com- 
ing over to the help of the Lord againft the mighty. But, if 
I may but know the truth, and pleafe the Lord, it is, with me, 
but a comparatively fmall thing to be judged of you, or of 
man's judgment. I do, indeed, wifli for the continuance of 
your good opinion and friendfhip, but I cannot pofFefs them 
at the expenfe of truth. That I might teftify unto you thefe 
things, I have ridded every thing which the world calls valuable. 
I am now determined, and through the grace of our Lord 
Jefus Chrift I hope that to the end of my life I lliall be deter- 
mined, to venture every thing in defence of the do<5lrines and 
ordinances and chnrch of the Son of God, I befeech all of 
you, who know the grace of our Lord Jefuf, that ye do not as 
did many of the chief rulers in Ifrael. They believed on 
Chrift, but did not confefs him, becaufe of the Pharifees, left 
they fhould be put out of the fynagogue ; for they loved the 
praife of men, more than the praife of God. Johv^ xii. 42, 43. 



92 A MINIATURE HISTORY, ^C, 

You have now heard mC; and know what I do. You will 
therefore now make up your judgment. But I pray you, 
remember one thing : With what judgment ye judge, ye 
fhall be judged. 

I am J Reader, 

Thy Servant, for the GofpePsfake, 

DANIEL MERRILL. 



Ext ra8 from the Bapttjl Mijlonary Magazine, No, 4. 

Account of the Baptift Church lately conftituted 
at Sedgwick^ Diftrid: of Maine. 

THE Rev. Daniel Merrill graduated at Dartmouth 
College, 1789, was ordained over the Congregational 
Church in Sedgwick, in September, 1793. His labours have 
been very much blefled among his people, who have expe- 
rienced feveral precious feafons of revival under his minillry, 
particularly in the years 1798, and 1801. 

Several eircumftances occurred to lead Mr. Merrill, in the 
courfe of the laft year, to review, with more critical attention, 
the grounds on which he had pra<5lifetl infant bapt'ifm. The 
rcfult of his inquiries may be learned from the preceding 
Sermons on Baptifm, and from the following account of his 
baptifni, &c. !► 

At a meeting of the church (or covenanted brethren) Feb. 
28, 1805, ^^^y voted unanimonfly to fend for ^a Council of 
Baptift minifters to come and alfift them in the following par- 
ticulars, viz. ift. To adminifter Chriftian baptifm to them ; 
2d. To conftitute them into a church upon the primitive 
Baptift platform ; 3d. To fet over them in the Lord the 
Rev. Daniel Merrill, to be their minifter. 

Agreeably to their requeft, Meifrs. Pitman of Providence, 
Baldwin of Bofton, and Williams of Beverly, accompanied by 
a number of brethren, took paflage at Salem, at 8 o'clock on 
Thurfday evening the 9th day of May, inftant, and arrived at 
Sedgwick the Saturday following, at one, P. M. Lord^s-day, 
half paft 10 o'clock, Mr. Pitman preached from A<fls v. 20. 
After an intermiffion of half an hoXir, Mr. Baldwin preached 
from I Cor. iii. 9. After another intermifiion of a few min« 
utes, Mr. Williams addieifed the people again from Proverbs 
XXV. 25. At 6, Mr. Buld\A^in preached again from Solomon's 
Song, i. 8. 

Monday, May 12, at 2, P. M. the Council formed, and then 
adjourned until the next day. At 3, afTembled in the Meet- 
ing-houfe, and Mr. Williams preached from John xiv. 21. 
After which proceeded to an examination of the candidates 
for baptifm, until the day was fpent. 

Tuefday, 13th, examined a number more candidates. At 
half paft 10, Mr. Williams preached particularly on the infti- 
tution, from A<5ls ii. 41, Immediately after, we repaired ta 



d4f Account of Sedgwick Baptifi ChurcE, 

the water's fide. The place fixed upon for the adminiflratioH 
of this ^ilemn ordinance was in the tide waters of Benjamin's 
River, about one mile from the fea. A more beautiful or 
convenient place is fcarcely to be imagined. 

The land adjoining was fufficienlly elevated to accommodate 
fpecVators with the befl: poffible profpedl ; and yet Hoping fo 
gently to the margin of the river, that thofe at the far theft 
diftance might fee as plainly as thofe who Rood nigheft. 

As foon as the people were aflembled at the v»^ater*s fide, 
folemn prayer was offered up to that God whofe oidinance we 
were going to attend. A profound filence rejgned through 
the affembly, when Mr. Baldwin took Mr. Merrill bj the hand, 
and walking flowiy into the water, repeated thefe words, j:'lnd 
they went donun both into the luatert both Philip and the Eunuch^ 
and he baptized him. When they had gotten to a fuitai)le depth, 
the ordinance was performed. Mr. Merrill, rifing from the 
watery grave with a ve% pieaf^mt, fmiling countenance, could 
not refrain expreffing the heart-felt fatisfa(fl:ion he enjoyed in 
this a6t of obedience. As they afcended out of the water, 
Mr. Williams went down with Mrs. Merrill, repeating thefi? 
words, ^nd they tuere both righteous before God, lualking in all 
the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blamelefs. In this 
way the baptizing was conduced, until all the candidates 
prefent were baptized. Here, we beheld fixty-fix perfons 
buried in baptifm by thefe two adminiftrators, in forty-two 
minutes ! The candidates, both females as well as males, de* 
fcended into the water vnth the greateft calmnefs imaginable | 
and in general, they came out of it rejoicing in fuch a manner 
as we have feldom feen. Numbers of them could not refrain 
giving giory to God our Saviour, who by his own example 
marked out this humble, bleffed way. The fpe<5lators behaved 
with the utmoft propriety. They were not only folemn, but 
many of them were in tears. A heart muft be adamant not 
to have foftened at fjch a moving foene. The fervice was 
concluded by prayer and finging. 

At 5 o'clock the people aifembled again at the Meeting- 
houfe, and Mr. Pitman preached to them from John xii. 26. 

WednefJay morning ihe Council met and arranged the 
bulinefs of the afternoon. Then examined and baptized 
nineteen candidates more, In the fame place and manner as 
defcribed above. At i o'clock affembled again in the Meet- 
ing -houfc ; when the baptized members, having, as we hope, 
6rft given themfelves to the Lord, now gave themfelves to one 



AclGunt of Sedgwick Baptiji Church, 95 

another by the will of God. After thus covenanting with 
each other, the Rev. Mr. Cafe, by the appointment of the 
Council, addreffed them in a few words, and gave the right 
hand to them, in token of our fellowfliip with them as a fifter 
church of Chrift ; and by folemn prayer, commended them to God 
and the nvord of his grace, nvhich is able to build them up, and give 
them an inheritance among all them that are fandified. 

The Council immediately proceeded to ordain Mr. Merrill. 
Mr. Baldwin introduced the folemnity by prayer ; and 
then addreffed the people in a well-adapted and very impref- 
five difcourfe, founded on part of the 3d verfe of the epiftle of 
Jude : Earnefdy contend for the faith once delfoered to the faints* 
The ordaining prayer was made by the Rev. Elifha Snow of 
Thomaftown ; the charge, by the Rev. Abraham Cummlngs 
of Vinal-Haven ; the right hand of fellowfliip, by thj Rev. 
Elidia Williams of Beverly ; and the concluding prayer, by 
the Rev. John Pitman of Providence. 



MANNING Iff LORING, No. 2, CORNHILL5 

Have for fale, among a great variety of other valuable Books, the 
following interefting Publications, Viz. 

Short Hiftory of the ancient Ifraelites : with an 
account of their Manners, Cuiloms, Lav^'s, Polity, Religion, 
Sedls, Arts, and Trades, Divifion of Times, Wars, Captivities, 
&c. By Dr. Adam Clarke. Price i dol. 25 cents. 

Zion's Pilgrim. By Robert Hawker, D. D. 
63 cents. In this interefting and ferious little work, the fol- 
lowing fubjecls are evangelically treated in the way of narrative. 

1. The Moral Man. 2. The Moral Preacher. 3. The 

Family at Prayers. 4. The Traveller. 5. The Prayer- 
Meeting. 6. The Poor Man*s Experience. 7. The Mournful 
Believer, 8. The Crie« of Unbelief. 9. A Believer under 
the Hidings of God's countenance. 10. The Sermon. 11. 
The Remarks. 12. The Dead Child, i :?. The Suicide. 14. 
The Ploughman. 15. The Strayed Sheep. 16. An Inn. 
17. The Jew. 18. The Diary. 19. Market day. 20. The 
Grace. 21. The Paralytic. 22. The Stable Boy. 23- The 
Difafter. 24. My Relation?. 25. The Book. 26. The 
Brothers. 27. The Houfe of the Interpreter. 28, The Pic- 
ture Room. 29^ Monuments. 30, Mottos. 



BOOKS for fale by Manning £if Loring. 
Life and Charader of Mifs Sufanna Anthony, 

of Newport. Containing Extracfls from her Writings. By 
Dr. Hopkins. Price 75 cents. 

Romaine's Triumphs of Faith, Walk of Faith, 
and Life of Faith. 3 dols. 50 cents. 

An elegant edition of Mrs. Rowe's devout Ex- 
ercifes of the Heart, with a copperplate. Price i dol. 

New Pocket Biographical Didionary : contain- 
ing Memoirs of the nioft eminent peifons, ancient and mod- 
ern, who have ever adorned this or any other country. By J, 
Kingfton. Price 2 dols. 

Memoirs of the Life and Character of the late 
Rev. Cornelius Winter. By the celebrated Wilham Jay. 
Price 1 dol. 12 cts. 

God the Guardian of the Poor, and the Bank 

of Faith : or, a Difplay of the Providences of God, which 
liave at fundry times attended the author. By William 
Huntington, S. S. Price i dol. 

Redemption, a Poem m five Books. By Jofeph 

Swain. To which are annexed, 108 Hymns by the fame 
author, and a fhort EfTay on Church ^eilowfhip and Social 
Religion. Price 87^ cents. 

Wright's complete Life of Chrift, of his Apof- 
tles, Evangelifts, Difciples, &c. including the lives of John the 
Baptift, the Virgin Mary, and many other eminent perfon?, 
and primitive Chriftians. With Plates. Folio. 5 dols. 

Buck's Treatife on Religious Experience : in 
which its nature, evidences, and advantages are confidered, 
under the following heads, viz, — 

The nature of Religious Experience in general. — The ad- 
vantages of Experience. — The Young Chriftian's Experience. 
— Experience of the Chriftian in middle age.— D ill reding Ex- 
perience. — On happy Experience. — Remembrance of paft Exw 
perience. — On the Relation of Experience. — The Aged Chrif- 
tian's Experience.— Dying Experience. — Advice refpeding 
Experience. The evil of the want of Experience, i dol. 

CT/' This work is recommended to the attentive perufal of 
young Chriftians in particular, and to all who defire inforr"«a- 
tion relative to the true Chriftian Charadler. 

Chriftian Memoirs in the form of a New Pil- 
grimage to the Heavenly Jeriifalem. By W. Shrubfolc. 
i dol. 1 2 cents. 



THE 



SECOND EXPOSITION 



OF 



Some of the falfe Arguments, Miftakes, and 
Errors 



REF. SAMUEL AJJSTIK 

PUBLISHED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIv-:. 



BY DANIEL MERRILL, 

PASTOR OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST IN SEDGWICK. 



And In the days of thcfe kings fiiall the God of heaven fee up a king- 
dom, which fliall never be deftroyed : and the kingdom fhall not be 
left to other people, but it fhall break in pieces and confume all theXe 
kingdoms, and it fhall ftand forever. JDaniel. 

Another parable fpake he unto them, The kingdom of heaven is like 
unto leaven, which a woniarjtook and hid in three meafures of meal, 
till the whole was leavened, 3^^-f Chrijl. 

" Buy the trutb^ and fell it not. Solomom. 



' BOSTON: 

Printed and fold by Manning ^ Loring, N*^- 2> CornhilL 
180T, 



District of Massachusetts, to ^'it : 

BE IT REMEMBERED,That on the twenty-futh day of June, In the 
thirty-firft year of the independence of the United States of Amer- 
ica, Manning ^ Lorino, of the faid diftrid, have depofited in this 
ofBce the title of a Book, the right whereof they claim as Proprietors, 
in the words following, ^0 w// ; — " The Second Expolition of feme of 
the falfe Arguments, Miftakes, and Errors of the Rev. Samuel Auftin, 
Publiflied for the Benefit of the Public. By Daniel Merrill, Paflor 
pf the Church of Chrift in Sedgwick." 

In conformity to the A&. of the Congrefs of the United States, enti- 
tled, " An A6t for the encouragement of learning, by fecuring the 
copies of maps, charts, and books, to the Authors and Proprietors of 
fuch copies, during the times therein mentioned :" and alfo to an Adl, 
entitled, " An Ad fupplementary to an Aft, entitled, An Ad: for the 
encouragement of learning, by fecuring the copies of maps, charts, and 
books, to the Authors and Proprietors of fuch copies, during the times 
therein mentioned ; and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of 
defigning, engraving, Stnd etching hiflorical and other prints." 

WILLIAM S. SHAW, Clerk af the DifinB of MaJfachufetU. 



To the Reader. 



DEAR FRIEND, 



1 the carelefs fmneVy. and to the indolent and 
erroneous faint y I appear a fool ; and the prefent coniroverfyy 
efpecially on my ftde, to he needlefs and lukhout profit. But 
it 'will be foan knoivn^ that mwe is depending o?i it than are 
all the treafurei of the Indies j or than the pleafures cf time. 
It has been Satan^s fubtiliyy from the beginnings to lead men 
from God's inflitutiom. A compliance ivith thi: fuhtilty ivas 
the fin of our firfl parents^ and ruined our race. A compli- 
ance ijuith this pro'ocked God to cafi the ten tribes as out of 
his fight. A negleEl of the Lord^s ordinances carried the 
Jews into the Bahylonijh captivity for feventy years. For 
the fame profanation of the Lord's ordinanceSy they are fionxr 
a t aunty a bye-wordy and a curfe, among all nations. A 
compliance ivith the fame device of Satan produced Antichrifi.^ 
mid fill upholds him. 

The devil is the fame deceiver now that he nvas nearly fix 
thoufand years ago. He then reprefented fin as a pleafant 
things and the ivay to ix>ifdom. Jufl fo fiow. Thofcy ivho 
in any and every age have conftdered the pofitive infiifuiions 
of the Lord to be of very facred importancey have been called, 
by perhaps every name ivhich the malice of Satan could invent, 
Thefe ill names and reproaches are fill the lot offuch as keep 
the ordinances as Chrifi delivered them. What falfehoods 
have been ivickedly circulated againfl the Author of thefe 
pages ! Hoiv many^ from whom we might have eKpeEied 
better things ^ have faidy Report y and lue nvill report it ! 

Kind reader y I kno w but one thing ivhich the public can 
lay to my charge^ and it is this : — / am Jealous fr the honour 
of Jefusy the King of the Gentiles as well as jews. I plead 
for obedience to his inflitutions and ordinances. I plead againjl 
thofe ivho would and do corrupt them, I plead againft the 
prieji and people who difobey my King, J plead with argU" 



TO THE HEADER. 



meids fo plain, that a child may imderfand. I pkad the 
plain -word, the open -word, the unadulterated word 'of 
God, as m, defence. I ha-oe injured no man in this matter, 
otherv,,Je than I have charged guilt upon the corrupters of 
Gods -word. My opponents dtfpife me, but the Lord -Jit 
rehue them. It ,s his caufe ivkich I defend. He will one 
day plead my caufe, and put my enemies to floame. I have 
and do Jldl, tudhngly bear reproach for Jefus' fake I 
heartdy conmiferate the cafe of thofe who are on the optofte 
jiae. IJee tceir end coming -. it may not be far off. 

Keader, Ifrael's defpifng Elif.h did not five fh'em , fu- 
dah sfetwg Jeremtahat nought did not five them , nor iill 
tt avail the oppofers to fit at nought the baptized church, with 
their leaders. > */^ 

th^li?h ih^'^ '■'-'ChnJliaj,,Iam a real BaptijJ, and 
the Lord hath made me both If I be a Chriflian, 'then in 
thefnceray of my heart, I befeech thee to inquire for the 
lf>^fChrifs houfe, as for thy life, for it is^for tly Ife- 
fir others wil foon receive of the plagues of Antichriff 
When you fhah fie, in the following pa^es, Jth whatfM 
arguments, miflahes, and errors, Mr. A. hath laboured to 
dejend ^" Me, I pray thee afk thyfef this queflion,-Can 
the caufe of truth thus labour, and need fuch mlns of defence 
tn the hands of an able difputant ? The reafon why Jr A 
hatbfo committed himfelf is not becaufe he is unable to a'rfu'e 

Tolefond fid^t '"' '" —" ^/^" '-'"^ ""'--'"'^ 
I now commit the matter to God and to the reader's bet 
judgment, praying the Father of Lights to fend forth litt 
and truth, and fpeedily fubdue the wild uni hilflf. ^ 
With good will to all men, 

lam the reader's friend, 

THE AUTHOR. 

Sedgwick, August ii, i8o6. 



Second Expofition, ^x.. 



! We appeal to the Bible ^ to Jiuhborn fa8s^ and to 
common fenfe. 



TO ALL WHOM IT MAY CONCERN. 

MEN, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 

]V1Y public writings are ftill nttended with a 
feries of pain and pleafure. It is painful to me to contra- 
did men of education, talents, and refpe^ftability, and to be 
contradided by them, as has been the cafe, and probably 
will be for the prefent. But it is pleafmg, that God, who 
feparated me from my mother's womb, hath called me, not 
only to the know^ledge of his \vord_ generally, but to know 
the order of his houfe, and to defend it. 

I am very little difappolnted at the reception which my 
writings receive : for when God taught me to diftover the 
blindnefs and errors in which I and my brethren were, I 
faw diredly that my repentance and reformation would 
bring im army of oppofers : for the moment in which I 
condemned myfelf, I condemned them ; and when I for- 
fook my evil pradices, I practically condemned thofe who 
continued in them. 

My Lord and Mafter tv^is called Beelzebub, and his fird 
apofties were faid to be mad. I calculated to partake of 
fome of the fame kind of ufage. That many of the wicked 
oppofe me, is not ftrange ; that hypocritical fcribes and 
pharifees oppofe me, is no caufe of wonder; that good 
men, who have not light and refolution fuiiicient to re- 
nounce tlieir educational prejudices, fhould oppofe me, is 
nothing more than might h^Te been expeded, nor is this 
different from what was expeded; but that good men 



6 Second Expofilion of 

(liould life the artillery of the wicked, and defend their 
errors by fophiftry, and 1 might almofl fay by deception, 
is not what I fo fully expe<fled as I find to be true. Nor 
was I fully apprifed, that good men would treat me with 
all that contempt with which the men of Succoth did Gid- 
eon, and Nabal the fervants of David. But I find fome 
are difpofed much the fame way. I have no difpofition to 
teach them, with the thorns and briars of the wildernefs, 
nor with the fword of fteel : but I truft in the God of 
Ifrael, that the day is not far off, when they fhall be taught 
by the fword of the Spirit, which is the word of God ; and 
when they {hall be willing to hear, and fhall treat with more 
refped and much lefs rudenefs, fuch as would inftrud them, 

Mr. Samuel Auftin 1 confider to be one of thefe good 
men. He is impatient of contradicflion, and has informed 
the world that he hath clcfed his public correfpondence 
with me j yet my pen muft expofe his errors, and the public 
muft hear it. At the fame time, I pray the Lord tkit not 
a fentence may efcape my pen, which fliall give either him 
or his brethren neediefs pain. It is alfo my defire, that I 
may never withhold a truth which the caufe of Chrift fliall 
require me to make public. It is truth, plain truth, on 
which I depend, for the fupport of Chrift's caufe ; which I 
hope is my caufe. 1 fhall not ridicule Mr. A., nor fhall I 
attempt to defpife him, or fpare him out of pty ;* n©r do 
I afk him ever to fpare me again, becaufe he fo pities my 
weaknefs that he will not fully ex/>qfe the nahednefs of the land, 
I afk no favour, in this way, from Mr. A-, nor from any 
other man. Let truth be defended, let truth be thoroughly 
defended, though I appear a fool. 

I can with fome degree of fincerity fay, I pity Mr. A. ; 
yet I pity the fuffering caufe of truth more. It is my fet- 
tled judgment, that he thinketh himfelf to be doing God 
fervice, in his oppofition to the caufe of the Son of God. 
It will, no doubt, wound his feelings, when I fhall prove 
him guilty of fophiftry, and miftakes, and mifreprefenta- 
tions, in his zealous labours for the caufe of error; but I 
muft confider his feelings ;is he alfo may foon confider 
them, of very little worlk, when they ar-e to be wounded 
t»r truth given up. 

I fhall not mention every miftake and error which are 
found in his Letters ; but fhall endeavour to give fuch an 
anceunt of them generally, that the reader may not, unlefs 

* See Mr. Auftin's Letters., p. ao, 4, 3. 



Mr, Aujiin's Mljlaka, 7 

he loves darknefs rather than light, be ftumbled in them* 
It might not be neceilary to make any reply, were it not 
that in his title pag« he promifed to do fomething, and 
ibme of his readers might take it for granted that he had, 
unlefs his falfe arguments, his weak arguments, his miiVakes, 
mifreprefentations, &c. were expofed. This I fhall now do. 
But previoufly, it may be well to note, that Mr. A. is on 
the retreat ; for he concedes, 

1. That fprinkling is not baptifm ; or, that he is unable 
to prove it to be fo. His words are, page 8, " Neither 
have I faid that fprinkhng is baptifm. Here, again, is 
nnfairnefs. Where is quotation ?" I will furnifh him with 
more than one. Says Mr. A. in his firft pamphlet to me, 
page 46, *< Why may it (external baptifm) not as well be 
by affafion m fprinkUng P'^ Again, page 100, fays be, " We 
deny that imnierficn is any more baptifm ih^njprinkiing or 
pouring." My cbfervation upon this is, When a good man 
iiath repeatedly advocated a certain tenet, and after wards^, 
when charged with it, denies his havmg fpoken in its fa- 
vour, he muft have forgotten it j and if he be hnneft, he 
mufi be dilpofed to relinquilh it, when he charges his cr- 
ponent with unfairnefs for placing it to his account. 

2. He concedes, that psedobaptifm hath no martyrs to 
witnefs for it. Page 15, he fays, " By confeffbrs, you 
mean fuch as have fufiered martyrdom for the doc'trine of 
pxdobaptifm. I never pretended we had any. What the 
reafons are that we have none, I may not be able to aflign." 
The reafons are very plain. Pacdobaptifm was aj pointed 
by men, not by the Lord ; and it was appointed for men, 
not for the Lord ; for worldly, fuperiliiious men too, and 
for fuperftitious purpofes. Thefe are reafons enough why 
God never fufiered any of his friends to die in the defence 
of it. 

The public fhall now be prefented with a few famples of 
Mr. A.'s falfe argumentations or fophifms. 
' I. Says he, pages 10, 11, " Peirr, influenced by his 
carnal prejudices, thought he mini; by no means come unto 
one of another nation, becaufe they were not of the cir- 
cumcifion ; but it was told him. What God hath cleanfed 
that call not thou common. The character of Cornelius, 
if we are to be governed by the decifion of God, was a full 
warrant for Peter to hold communion with him ; and it 
would feem, though he had this ground only for it, he hav- 
ing not yet been baptized, had he refufed he would have 
wl-hftoodGod: for he lays, * Porafmuch then, as God 



8 Second Expofition of 

^eave them the like gift that he did unto us, what was I 
that 1 could withftand God.' So it is apprehended, that 
the allowed fad, that God hath cleanfed this multitude of 
pious perfons (juft mentioned) and fealed them as his, with 
the like gift of the Holy Ghofl which he hath bcflovved on 
you, obliges you not to treat them as common or unclean." 

Mr. A.'s argument, in plain Englifh, is this: — Peter 
would have withiiood God, had he not have had commu- 
nion with the devout Cornelius, who had received the Holy 
Ghoft ; and had he not baptized him, feeing he received 
the word gladly, and was a qualified fubje<5l for the ordi- 
nance. I'herefore, and what ? This, The Baptijls nvithjland 
God^ by refujmg to commune at the Jjord^s table lulth thofe ivho 
are not lapiixed. This is one of the fir ft rate of fophifms. 
-Peter v/oald have withftood God, ]iad he refufed to have 
baptized believing Cornelius ; therefore, the baptized church 
withftand God, becaufe they lefufe to commune with un- 
baptized peribns. Peter's ccmmifiion and orders were to 
baptize thoie who believed, therefore he would have with- 
ftood God had he refufed. The Baptifts have no commif- 
fion, order, or liberty from God, to commune at the Lord's; 
table with any till they are baptized, yet they ivithjland God 
if thsy refufe. Into what abfurdity do Mr. A.'s errors drive 
him ! But fays he, " Pious perfons having received the like 
gift of the Holy Ghoft, obliges the Baptifts not to treat 
them as common or unclean." Certainly, and we do not. 
We fpeak unto them the good word of the Lord, and invite 
them to iwifake the papiftical errors of fprinkling and infant 
baptifm ; and when they, Cornelius like, will hear whatfo- 
ever the Lord faith unto them, we gladly commune with 
ihem in both the ordinances, and in God's appointed way 
too ; (irft in baptilm, then in the fupper. 

2. The next falfi? argument or fophifm of his \vhich I 
Diall mention, is the aniwer to the queftion which I put to 
him, in the v/ords following :-- -Suppofe there be a refor- 
mation at this preient time in Worcefter, where you refide. 
iSiippofe fifty perfons of the brighteft talents be converted. 
Not one of them has been baptized, or even fo much as 
fprinkled. 1 providentially ride through the town next 
week ; by chance I meet Mr. A. in the ftreet, and put this 
queltion — Have thofe very reljpedtable charadlers, who have 
of late been hopefully converted, joined the church (mean- 
ing the vifible church) ? The fophiftry is in his anfwer» 
page 14. His anfwer is, "Yes. What! become con- 
verted to Chrift, and yet not join his kingdom .•*" Here 



Mr, Auftiris Miflakes. 9 

he lells me and the public that his anfwer is yes ; whereas, 
if I c\\-\ imderiland any thing by what he fays, he has given 
no anfwer to the queH-ion, hat his anfwered another, which 
I pat not. The quedion propofed was, Have thefe con- 
verted unhaptized perfons joined the church, the vifible 
church ? Yes, lays Mr. A. they have joined Chrift's king- 
dom. Yes ; but this is not the queftion. The queftion is, 
Have they joined the vilible church of Chrift ? Yes, fays 
he, they have joined his kingdom. .If I comprehend Mr. 
A. this is theer fophillry and evafion, and manifeils that 
the place is too ftrait for him. If they have joined the 
vifible church, why do he and his brethren converfe with 
them, in order to their joining ? Have Mr. A. and his 
brethren been idling with all the perfons whom they have 
profefledly admitted into the vifible church ? and does he 
fuppofe that his brethren, through the Chriilian world, 
have been merely playing with folemn things, when they 
have publickly received vifible converts into the vifible 
church ? Not a child in Worcefter, of ten years old, but 
can at once anfwer the queftion, which Mr. A. appears un- 
willing to folve. Indeed, it is a diiiicnlt one for'him : for 
if he fay no, it fpoils his argument for communion with 
unhaptized perfons; if he fay yes, that they have joined 
the vifible church, then he is contrary from all men of 
whom I have ever before heard or read. Befides, he would 
be fubje<n to another difficiJty ; perhaps not one in ten 
thoufanJ, if one in the world, will believe him : even chil- 
dren knov/ better. Indeed, the time fpoken of by the 
prophet is come, when children ihould rule the profeiTed 
people of God. I am forry to fay thus of Mr. A., for I 
beheve him a valuable man in many rerpe«5ls ; but his good 
things muft not fan(5tion his bad ones. When he employs 
his time and talents to defend Antichrift's ordinances and 
church order, he muft be expofed and rebuked fharply, 
that he may be found in the faith. 

3. We will now attend to another of Mr. A.'s fophifms^ 
by which he overturns his whole fcheme. 

His fcheme or notion is, that the being bom again, and 
efpecially its being known, conftitutes perfons members ^f 
the vifible church. For, page 14, he fays, " What ! be- 
come converted to Chrift, and not join his kingdom?'* 
intending the vifible church, unlefs he meiint to evade. 
But now we Ihall fee him, in contradi<ftfon to himfelf, 
plead with his full ftrength againft it ; or otherwife, he i- 
purpofely keeping the fubjed in debate out of light, 
B 2 



lo Second Zxpofition vf 

We will hear what he fays. In page IC2, of his Sid 
Letters, liis words are, " Whatever be defigned by the 
kingdom of God, and whatever is to be underllood here, 
by being born of water and of the Spirit, both are necef- 
fary, as pre-requifites to a perfon's entering into this king- 
dom. 'J'he birth goes before the entrance." To this, in 
my Letters to him, page 73, my anfwer is, If you will b« 
kind enough to inform the public, for how long a time a 
perfon muji; be born before he enters into the world, then 
they will poifefs a neceffary datum to underftand your new 
do(5trine, that the birth goes before the entrance. In reply 
to this, fays Mr. A. page 26, " Is regeneration then, in all 
cafes, an entrance into glory ?'* Here he ftiifts the fubjedt 
which is debating. I was not fpeaking of the kingdom of 
glory, but of the vifible kingdom of Chrift. Here he takes 
for granted what I have no di.pofition to deny ; and then 
would have the publ c believe, what he is unable to prove, 
that the being born of water, or that baptifm, is not the 
entrance into the vifible kingdom of Chrilt. He takes for 
granted, that regeneration is not, in all cafes, an entrance 
into glory. Very well ; no perfon faid it was : but his 
argument, or conclufion, is what I diflike. His argument, 
in ihort, is this : Regeneration is not an entrance into glo- 
ry ; therefore, bapt-lm is not an entrance into the vifible 
church. Such an argument as this, proves nothing to any 
man's advantage : it is a mere fophifm. 

I will here, that every thing may be perfedlly plain, pre- 
ient with exa(5tnefs my femiments on this fubjedt. 

Y\r% Regeneration, or the new birth, is an entrance into 
the fpjritual, or what is ufually termed the Invifible, king- 
<lom of Chrilf. 

Secondly, The being born of water, or baptifm, is an 
entrance, or the entrance, into the vifible kingdom of Chrift. 

Thirdly, Dying in Chrijl is the entrance into the kingdom 
of glory. 

Now, it is the entrance into this fecond kingdom, the vifi- 
ble kingdom of Chrilf, which is the fubje(5l of controverfy. 

We fhall now Ihow that Mr. A. has changed the fub- 
j.e<51, or othervvife is chargeable with felf-contradi(51ion ; he 
will acknowledge which he pleafes. If he have changed 
,the fubje<^, and proved what is not controverted, and ^i^^i 
taken for granted the fubjedl of debate, he is chargeable 
with fophiftry, or falfe and difmgenuous argumentation. 
If he have not changed the fubje<5t, but intends the viiible 
khigdcm of Chrift, then he is guilty of felf-contradidion, 



Mr. Auftins Mi/lakes. ii 

as will now appear. Page 26, he fays, the words of Chrift 
are, * Except a man be born of water, and of the Spirit, he 
cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Now, fays he, 
" Let us apply this mode of expreflion to a familiar cafe. 
King Ahafuerus makes a banquet for queen Efther, and 
invites Haman. He orders Haman to be told, that except 
he is habited in white, he cannot enter in to the banquet, 
Haman puts on white clothing accordingly. Now, fays 
Mr. A., is Haman's clothing himfelf in white, before he 
enters in to the banquet, preparatory to it, or the entrance 
itfelf?" 

By the illuftration in this his familiar cafe, he tells us, if 
there be any meaning in it, that to be born again, or con- 
verted to Chrift, is not the entrance into the vifible king- 
dom of Chrift, but preparatory to it. But in page 14, in 
anfwer to a difficult queftion which I propofed to him, he 
told us that it is the entrance ; not only fo, bat he tells us 
that he hath the apoftles with him in the matter. I pre- 
fume he will not tell us that the apoftles are with him on 
both fides of the contradi<5tion. I do not fo much blame 
Mr. A, for contradi(5ling himfelf, as I do for his continuing 
to travel in that crooked path, in which no man can go 
ftraight. 

The above may ferve as f imples of Mr. A.'s fophifms, 
or falfe arguments. I agree to prefent more of them, and 
t© (how that his reply to my Letters is little elfe but one 
continued fophlfm, fhould the public good demand it, and 
the Lord give me opportunity. 

The public (hall now be prefented with a few of his 
weak arguments, and he appears to have none but of this 
defcription. 

I . The firft weak argument which I fhall mention, is in 
page 32 i and it is given the public in order to deftroy the 
natural argument for immerfion which we have in Mark 
i. 5. from the force of the word in. The text is this, * And 
there went out unto him all the land of Jiidea, and they of 
Jerufalem, and were all baptized of him in the river (yi 
Jordan.' The common fenfe of this text is, that they were 
jmmerfed, or buried in baptifm. But to fet this natural 
and fcriptural argument a(ide, Mr. A. prefents the public 
with the following argument. " I have (fays he) a Bible 
pretty full of plates ; in one of them referring to this tranf- 
a<5lion, the Baptift and the Saviour are reprelented as ftand- 
ing in the margin of the ftream, to a depth a little above 
their ankles, and John is pouring water froro his hand on 



12 Second Expojition of 

the head of the Saviour." Had Mr. A. have added, that 
this plate of his was inferted in his Bible b^ the dire(5tioa 
of the pope, on purpofe to deceive thofe who regard pic- 
tures more than they do words, very few of his readers 
would probably have been deceived by it. 

2. Another of Mr. A.'s weak arguments is found in 
page 13 ; it is againfl what is called clofe communion, and 
in the words following : — " O thou fpirit of Brainerd, red- 
ing in the bofom of thy much-beloved Jefus, doft thou wit- 
nefs the fentence which has been pafled upon thee by one 
of thy fellow difciples in this world ? Doft thou hear what 
is faid of thee among men, that when with thern, even 
when thoUfdidft drain the energies of thy nature in impor- 
tunate prayer, and in ince/Tant labours for the converfion 
of poor heathens, thou waft without, where are dogs, and 
forcerersj and whoremongers, and murderers ?'* 

What a pity Mr. A. had not have told us one thing 
more, and have proved it to us, that the amiable and pious 
David Brainerd was a perfecfl: man, and could not err ; 
then his argument would have had force, and we fhould 
have concluded that he walked in all the ftatutes and ordi- 
nances of the Lord blamelefs ; then to have known his 
practice would have been the fame as to have known the 
word of God and our duty. Till Mr. A. ftiall prove this 
much needed point, his argument muft ftand for a lueak 
one ; for it is nothing to the prefent buiinefs to know what 
Mr. Brainerd did or did not, as to divine inftitutioas, unlefs 
it be firft proved that he could not err. 

3. But Mr. A. has another argument, page 21, which 
beggars both thefe ; it is upon the fame fubje^ with the 
preceding argument, againft clofe commuiiion, or againft 
my arguments for it, and to deftroy them all at one ftroke. 
His words are, " About a year ago, I was at the houfe of 
a minifter in this county, and the converfation turning 

mpon the exceffive vociferation which feme men pra<5life in 
prayer, the lady of the houfe obferved, that a fliort time 
before a Baptift minifter called upon them, and received 
hofpitality for the night. According to the orders of the 
houfe, the minifter being abfent, he was reqiiefted to lead 
the family in prayer. He did fo ; but it was with fuch a 
ftraining of the voice as fairly ftunned the family, and 
fpoiled their devotions. Having fat a little while after the 
conclufion of the prayer, the lady took the liberty to alk 
him, Why, Sir, do you halloa fo in prayer ? Do you im- 
agine the Diviae Being is a great way off ? He replied, 



Mr. AujTirHs Mijlakes, 13 

that he had got into the habit, and had not, indeed, much 
to fay for it ; but, in fadt, it was every thing to him, for if 
he did not pray in that founding mnnner, his people would 
not think it was praying at all.'* 

This is, I confefs, a fmgular argument ; but how it 
flrikes againft clofe communion, I have not ingenuity fuffi- 
cient to difcover $ for furely this Baptift minifter was for 
open communion, whilft the good lady and her family op- 
pofed it. Why Mr. A. ihould tell fuch a foolifh and im- 
probable ftory as this, is doubtlefs beft known to himfelf. 
However, 1 will venture to expofe one of his reafons, ar.d 
it is this, — To gratify not a very good difpofition, in ridi- 
culing the Baptifts. Yet, as ridiculous as they are, he 
confelfcs his principal objedion againfl them is, their refuf- 
ing to commune with him in the fecond gofpel ordinance, 
whilfl; he rejecfls the firft. This rcafon is not given in his 
identical words, but I venture to propofe it to the public, 
as being fupported as his by facts and common fenfe. 

We Ihall now turn our attention to a few of Mr. A.*s 
mi (lakes ; by thefe, as well as by his fophiftry and Weak 
arguments, we may judge of the papiftical errors which he 
hath undertaken to defend. I do not fay, that by the m\(- 
takes we may judge of the man, for fliould.we, I apprehend 
we Ihould do him great injuftice, for the man is honoura- 
ble ; but his caufe and errors, which are now finking, are 
deteftable, and his defence of them miferable. To be fure, 
the man liimfelf appear$ to difadvantage, whilft defending 
lb bad a can'e ; and the many miftakes which he is obliged 
to make, whillt labouring to defend fo crooked a fide, mud 
excite fome unfavourable fentiments in thofe to whom lie 
is unknown. But if he fuffer a little, better fo than to have 
his errors pafs Vvnthout correclion ; indeed, deftrudlion is 
the deferved portion cf his errors : we muft therefore op- 
pofe fome of his miftakes. 

I. Ihe firft mi (lake which I fhall mention, is in his 
reply to tlie fc^llowing requeft, which I made in the 17th 
page of my Letters to him, and in thefe words : — Should 
you write again, pleafe to inform me by what authority 
you contradict the tranflators of the Bible, and injure the 
fenfe of this text, (Aifls xvi. 34.) by telling us, that the 
jailor rejoiced doniellically ? His reply is, page 6, " Is this 
Chriftian treatment, to charge me with contr^di(5ting the 
tranflators ? I have not done it." To fettle this matter, I 
will prefent the reader widi the words in (jueftion, both as 
given us by the tranflatois and by Mr. A. 



14 Seco7id Expofition of 

Trandators iUy, " He rejoiced, believing In God with 
all his houfe.'* 

Mr. A. fays, page 87, the proper rendering is, " He, 
having believed in God, rejoiced with all his houfe, or 
domelllcally," 

Here, the tranflators fay one things Mr. A . fays the proper 
rendering is another. The reader will judge whether Mr. A» 
does not ct)ntradi(ft them ; and if he does, this is one mijlahe. 
But Mr. A. has found a new turn to the original Greek 
participle for believing. In his former Letters, he told me 
it was in the fnigular number ; in my Reply I obferved, 
every Englifh reader, who is acquainted with the conftruc- 
tion of language, knows it is the fame in our common 
Bibles ; but now he has difcovered it to be In the perfcit 
tenfe, therefore, and what ? therefore, fays he, it ferves' to 
refcue the text from your prefumptuoiis comments. I will 
give the public the text, with Mr. A.'s participle rendered 
literally in the perfed time ; it (lands thus : — He (the 
jailor) rejoiced, havltig belle-oed In God vvitli all his houfe. 
I afk, what advantage is Mr. A.*s new difcovery to him ? 
and how does it refcue the text from my prefumptuous 
comments ? All my comments are, that the Bible fpeaks 
plain Englifh, and is to be taken ^s it fays. I appeal ta 
the world, to judge whofe comments are prefumptuous ; 
mine, for taking the Bible as it fays, or his, for changing 
both words and fenfe. But Mr. A. replies, ** Your pre- 
fumptuous comments are calculated to make your unlearn- 
ed readers conclude, that the jailor's houfehold are faid to 
be believers as well as himfelf." My anfwer is, the tranf- 
lators of the Bible tell us that this is the cafe, and is the 
fenfe of the original; and Mr. A. fays he has not contia- 
di(fted them, 'i'hen my comments are juft, and calculated 
to make m.y unlearned readers, and learned too, conclude 
juiftly, that the jailor believed and all his houfe. 

2. I will now prefent the reader with three or four of 
Mr. A.*s miftakcs, which he makes in writing lefs than a 
page. In pages 8, 9, he quotes three of my dennitions. 

Firft, Immerfion ia the name of the Lord Jefus, or in 
the name of the Fatlier, Son, and Holy Ghoft, is the only 
gofpel baptifm. 

Secondly, No perfon has a right to gofpel baptifm, but 
upon his making profeilion of gofpel faith. 

rhirdly. No perfon is a member of Chrift's vifible church 
till he is baptized. 



Mr. AuJilrCs Miftakes, 15 

To thefe Mr. A. replies thus : — " Thefe fentiments, I 
fa id, and you are not afhamed to avow the confequence, 
go to exclude from Chrift's vifible church all the multitude 
of eminently pious and holy perfons, male and female, who 
have lived and died the fubje<n:s of baptifm by fprinkling 
or affufion only, and merely becaufe they have not been 
baptized by immerfion. This was my leading objedion, 
and you appear to totter under the weight of it. It is 
ilrange it does not crujh you to the ground, I Jhould think 
any man, who had made fuch a conqueft over his preju- 
dices, could not have this army of co-heirs with Chrift of 
eternal bleffednefs pafs before his imagination, after having 
treated them in this cavalier way, without Jinking as low as 
the moji feeling felf-detejlation could place him. You fay, * If it 
be conclufivfi againft my principles, let it deftroy them.' 
It does^i Sir, dejlroy them. Let it but touch them^ and they vanijh 
Me a bubble:' 

All this fays Mr. A. We will attend to his variety of 
miftakes in this quotation. The firft is, That I appear to 
totter under the tuelght of his ohjv5tion. His objection is, 
that my principles go to exclude from Chrifl's vifible church 
all who are not baptized, or immerfed, in the name, &c. 
This is his obje<5lion, under which he fays I appear to totter. 
This is his mi/lake. For the avowing of this truth, fo far 
from making me totter^ it emboldens me to tell him another. 
That all who hold to and receive the human rite of fprink- 
ling, for the Lord's ordinance of baptifm, are within the 
limits of Antichrift*s church, and have fubmitted to his 
ordinance, and received one mark of the Beafl. Did Mr. A. 
know his duty and his privilege, he v^'ould come out from 
his errors, and efpeciaily from this, and be feparate ; then 
would the Lord receive him into his vifible church. 

But Mr. A. adds, ** It is ftrange my objedion does not 
crufli you to the ground." This is another of his miftakes. 
For it is not ftrange at all ; for the good word of God 
fupports me, by bearing its teftirnony in favour of the cor- 
redlaefs of my principles. The Lord tells us, that he hath 
I know not how many pious, godly perfons within the 
limits of Antichrift ; befides, he points out the time in 
which they would be within thefe limits, and informs us 
that this is the time. See Rev. x\!i. xviii. xix. xx. and 
particularly chap, xviii. 4. where he, by a voice as from 
heaven, calls to thefe perfons, faying, * Come out of her, 
my people, that ye be not partakers of her fms, and that 
yc receive not of her plagues.* Did M.r. A. know what 



1 6 Second Expqfition of 

he is doing, he would be aftonlihed and confounded. He 
is himfelf refufing to obey the Lord ; and not only fo, he 
is ignorantly doing what he can to blind others, fo that 
they alfo may be difobedient. This is a great miftake in 
him. He may think me bold ; I am fo, and truth makes 
me fo } yes, and the time is come, in which the children of 
God, who know the truth, may be bold. For the leaven, 
which r/as to leaven the whole lump, is remarkably fer- 
menting ; and the time is not far off, when the dominion, 
and the greatnefs of the kingdom under the whole heaven, 
fhould be given to God's people. The (lone cut from the 
mountain without hands, will foon fill the whole ear,th. 
At fuch a time, and thus circumllanced, fuch as know the 
flgns of the times, may be bold to vindicate the w^ays of 
God to men, and to aiTert the la'wS) ordinances, and rightful 
authority of their King. 

Another millake w^hich Mr. A. makes in the above 
quotation, is, that his obje(5tion deftroys my principles. 
Again, in the clofe of the pailage, he fays, *^ Let it but 
touch tliem, and they vanilh like a bubble." This is all 
miftake. The good man knows not what he fays, nor 
whereof he affirms. 

One fentence, which I have not yet noticed, deferves 
particular attention. '■^ I Jhould think (fays he) any man^ 
Kvho had made fuch a conquejl over his prejudices^ could not have 
this army of co-heirs luiih Chr'fl of eternal hlejfednefs pafs before 
his imagination, after having treated them in J:is cavalier way, 
'without Jinking as loiu as the mojl feeling Jelfdettjlation could 
place him»*' 

I forgive Mr. A. all ]ns rudenefs of fpeech, perceiving 
he hath a zeal for God, but in this particular not accord- 
ing to knowledge. He fuppofes that he is with the truth ; 
but, as his brother Emmons informs us, luhen a man comes 
to the truth, he knojfs it. Can he fuppofe, that I fhould 
deteft myfelf for telling him the truth, and for placing 
many of the Lord's people within the limits of Antichrift, 
when the Lord tells me they are there, and commands them t& 
come out ? Befides, who knows but God hath chofen me, to 
be one of the weak inftruments, by which his people (hall 
fo effedually hear his voice as to be obedient ? However 
this may be, one thing I know — it becomes me to declare 
his truth, and not be afraid. May Mr. A. hear and obey. 
3. I mud now mention another of his miftakes, which 
is alfo coQoefted with a fophifm. . 



Mr. Aufim^s Miftakes. 17 

I do not expofe Mr. A. that I may provoke him, unlefi. 
it be to relinquifli a bad caufe ; but that he may fee what 
abfurdities and blunders it unavoidably leads him into, and 
thus be perfuaded to gWQ truth one candid review. Mr. 
A. has abilities enough to go ftraight in a plain highway, 
but no man has a fufficiency to go thus in a crooked path. 
This miftake and fophifm of his are in page 12, whe*? 
his words to me are, " You fay, page 20, one of our prin- 
<iiples is, that no perfon is a fit fubjedt of baptifm, unlefs he 
be a penitent; if it is, (fays hej the greater is your error ; 
but I do not believe it is : it was not Dr. Gill's principle.*' 
This is Mr. A.'s miftake ; for there is not a Baptift in the 
world, nor has been, who has any principles upon the fub- 
je6t, but this is one of them, that no perfon is 2ijit fubjed of 
baptifm unlefs he be a penitent. Had Mr. A. have known 
the gofpel fitnefs for baptifm, he would, have known this 
with equal certainty that he knows an hypocrite is not a fit 
fubjed: for communion at the Lord's table. Befides, his 
argument to prove that Dr. Gill did not hold this principle 
is a mere fophifm, and proves no fuch thing. If Dr. Gill 
€xprefsly fays, as Mr. A. informs us, " that Simon Magus 
was baptized in a pure and apofloUc ivay,''^ this is no evi- 
dence that he was a fit fubje(n:. Simon Magus was hapti%ed 
upon a profejfion of faith ; this was the pure and apoftolic 
way ; yet he was not a fit fubjedt, he only appeared to be. 
The adminiftrator was but a man, and was therefore obli- 
ged to judge from what was vifible. Could the adminif- 
trator have feen Simon's true charader, he would have 
known him to be not a fit fubjed. The adminiftrator's not 
difcovering this unfitnefs, did not change Simon's hypocrify 
into gofpel fitnefs for baptifm ; yet, as Simon made pro- 
feflion of faith, and appeared to poffefs it, he was baptized 
in the pure and apoftolic way. 

4. Mr. A. in the fame page, gives us another of his 
miflakes. Says he, " Be this (about Simon) however as 
it may ; one of your principles is, that no perfon is a 
member of Chrift's church till he is baptized. This re- 
duces you to the neceffity of contending, that there may be 
millions of vifible Chriftians, eminently fuch, who are not 
in Chrift's vifible church. One would fuppofe beforehand, 
, that a man muft be put to it exceffively to maintain fuch a 
fentiment a^ this." To be fure, fuch as judge beforehand^ 
fuch as judge of a matter before they hear ity might fiippofe a 
man put to it exceffively, to ^airitain, that there may be 
c 



i8 Second Expofttion of 

millions of vifible Cbriftians, eminently fuch, who are no^ 
in Chrift's vifible church. But when one com«s to hear 
the matter, and finds this was to be the cafe, that many- 
were, at fuch a time as this, to be found, not only out of. 
CririlVs vifible church, but within the limits of Antichri(l*s, 
rmd efpecially when one comes to hear the Lord calling 
this multitude out of her, he no longer fuppofes the man 
holding this principle muft be put to it exceilively ; but he 
iinows the opponents have an hard fide to defend, and that 
they muft make many mijlakes. 

5. We will therefore atiend to another of Mr. A.'s mif- 
takes. Says he, pages 1 6, 1 7, a man " may have no know^l- 
edge of the vifible church, yet he may know that he is a 
fmner and needs forgivenefs. He may be acquainted with 
Ghrift, and the way of falvation through him, and believe to 
the faving of his foul. This may be known to hundreds of 
Chriftians, at a diftance. He may, of courfe, be a member 
of the vifible church : for a mari*s vifib'tlity refpe&s what he is 
in ihe eyes of others. Would he not be a member of the vjfible 
church, if he were baptized P If he luould, then the fuppofed 
dificuhy, from his fituation, is no difficulty at allJ^ 

Here Mr. A. gives up and condemns his whole fcheme, 
and then adds a great miftake at the clofe. The reader 
will bear in mind, that Mr. A/s fcheme is, that when a 
man is converted he belongs to the vifible church ; for he 
fays, pa^ge 14, "What! be converted to Chrift, and not 
join his kingdom ?'* as he explains himfelf. What ! become 
converted to Chrift, and not, at ihe fame time, become a 
member of his vi!ib4e church ? But here, he tolls us. That 
the converjion of an heathen being known to othersy is what con- 
flitutes him a member of the •vifible church. To ihow Mr. A. 
that by labouring to extricate himfelf from one perplexing 
cafe, he has involved himfelf in anotlier of equal difficulty, 
I will propofe for bis confideration this queftion : — Suppofe 
no Chriftian knew of this heathen man's converfion, would 
he then belong to the vifible church? If he anfvver, Yes, 
then he contradi(5ts what he has juft faid, that a man^s 'vrfi- 
bility refpeds what he is in the eyes of others. If he fay, No, 
then he gives up his fcheme, that a converfion of a perfcn 
conflitutes him a member of the vifible church, Mr. A. is in a 
perplexing cafe. But we wttl fee his miftake at the clofe. 
*♦ Would he not (fays he) be a member of the vifible 
church, if he were baptized ?'* To be fure, if he were bap- 
tized he would be a member of the vifible church ; for 
^ofpel baptifm is the very thing which conftitutes him a 



Mr. AuJiirCs Miftakes. \. 19 

member. Now, fays Mr. A. " if he would, tKen the fup« 
pofed difficulty, from his fituation, is no difficulty at all." 
That is, if a converted heathen, who is favoured with an 
adminiftrator, baptized, and thus received into the vifible 
church, would be a member of it, then there is no difficulty 
in fuppofmg him a member of the vifible church, tliough 
he has never been thus favoured, nor ever admitted into it. 
In what confufion are Mr. A.'s ideas ! ihe fault, however, 
is not his deficiency of talents, but in the miferably errone- 
ous caufe he is defending. 

6. But I haften to another of Mr. A.'s miftakes. In 
my Letters to him, page 38, my words are, — All your 
objection againft. allowing that the apoftie (in Rom. vi. 4. 
and Col. ii. 12.) alludes to and intends water baptifni, is 
confidered to ariiie from an apprehenfion that immerfion 
would certainly follow. His reply is, page 33, "You mud 
coniider it fo, jf you will ; but my apprehenfion really has 
another origin. It is, that an infuperable objedion would 
be furnilhed againft the apoftle's infpiraticn ; for then he 
would teach us, that water baptifm, inftead of the haptijm 
of thi Holy Ghcjly is the thing by which we become dead 
to fin and rife to newnefs of life." 

Here Mr. A. is again in difficulty. His difficulty arifes 
from a miftake v.^hich he has made. I will endeavour to 
expofe the one, and thus help him out of the other. His 
miftake is, that we ffiould endanger the infpiration of the 
apoftie, did we not believe that we become dead to fin and 
rife to newnefs of life by the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft. 
The fact is, Mr. A. has wholly jniflifken the fcriptures, in 
this matter^ They fay nothing about a perfon's becoming 
dead to fm, or rifmg to newnefs of hfe, by the baptifm of 
the Holy Ghoft ; nor by water baptifm, otherwife than by 
a figure. This expofes his mift ake, and opens the door for 
him to leave his difficulty, if he choofe. For lurely, our 
not believing contrary from the fcriptures, but believing 
them as they are, can furniih no infuperable objedlion, nor 
an objedion of any other kind, againft the infpiratic^n of 
the apoftie.* 

* This ir.iflake of Mr. A.'$, he might receive from the Rev. Mi, 
Pariih, of Byefield, whofe ftrong party Serinon was founded upon the 
fame miftake. Let the reader but be delivertd from this new notion, 
that pcrfons are bom again by being baptized with the Holy Ghoft, and 
he at once fees through the fallacy ai:d difcovers the profound weaknefs 
of what Mr P. lo fmartly laid againft the Baptiftf, in his Sermtn of 
Mey laft. The author has fallen into the Very nr.iftakc to wkich he 



20 Secojid Expofttkn cf \ 

7. I will now prefent the public with an whole duller 
of Mr. A.'s miftakes, and they may be taken as a fpecimeo 
of all the remainder ; afterwards iome of his mifreprefcnta- 
tions will be noticed. This group of millakes is in his 
47th page. In the firft place, I will prefent this bundle of 

confidercd the Baptlfts, on account of their extreme ignorance, to be 
much expofcd. He has, to an uncommon degree, mifaf>plicd one ©f the 
fi{;urc5 of mfpiration. He has been kind enough to inform us, that 
fpiritual bapdlm, or the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft, is the new birth, 
or regeneratica ; but has not furnifhed his authority. He tells us that 
the text means this. We deny that the text, or hat any other text in the 
Bible, has ever faid any fuch thing. How are we buried •with Cbrijl in 
baftifm^ cr rciftd ivitb bim in bcbtifm^ in the moment of regeneration, 
any more than in every fuccccding holy exercife ? This is a new iuvea« 
tion of his and his brethren, to ge rid of the gofpel baptifm. 

The old Rcmanifts corfidered ivaUr baptifm to be regeneration^ or the 
latter to be conneded with the former, or to depend on it ; fo that, 
when bapiirm was performed, regeneration was effeded. So have the 
Church of Englard confidcred this matter. But, if 1 miftake not, no 
author, till Mr. P. and fome of his brethren, to juftify their unfcripturai 
rite of fprinklirg, and to take from the baptized church the plain fcrip- 
ture account of go'^pcl baptiiKi, arofe, has ever pretended that regeneia- 
ton Is the baptifir. cf the Holy Ghoft. The Bible mentions nothing of 
their forced conflru^ion of the figurative language of infpiration. The 
fcripture account is totally different from Mr. P.'s. That inform* tis» 
Ads i. 5. that the difcip'es, who had long before followed their divine 
Lord in the regeneration^ fhould be baptized with the Holy Ghoft not 
tnany da-j.s ber.te. Mr. P. m.ufl either conclude, that perfons in the days 
of ehriil and his apoftles were regenerated twice, or that the baptllm 
of die Holy Ghoft is now a different thing from what it then was ; or 
that regeneration is not the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft ; and cenfequently^ 
that a little Kore eruditian is ntcejfary to bis exjilaini/ig the bold Jigures of 

But to fpoil Mr. P 's whole fuppofcd ftrength at a ftrokc, let the 
reader but view his ccntraft. h Is this — " As the burial of Jefus Chrift 
gsve evidence that he hid really died, the juft for the unjuft ; fo we, in 
our fpiritual baptifm, Ihow ourfehes to be really dead to fin." 

Mr. P. CCmY^^xctor equuls jpiriiual haptj/m\\'llhrrger:eraticnyf^%& 13I, 
of the Collediou. Then we will take regeneration inftead of fpiritual 
baptifm, and fee how his contrsft will f?and the teft of fcripture and his 
own fentiments " As the burial of Jefus Chrift gave evidence that he 
had really died, the juft for the unjuft ; io we, in regeneration, flicw 
oujfelvcs to be really dead to fm." 

The fcriptures (ay, The wind bloweth where it lifteth, and thou 
hcareft the found thereof, but canft not tell whence it cometh nor 
whither it goeth : fo is every one that is bora of the Spirit. Bring forth 
fruits meet for repentsncej or as cvi<icnce of repentance. By their fruits 
ye ftiall know thtm, ^c. In thcfe teyts, ncr in any other, is there any 
intimation, that in regeneration we ftiow ourfelves to be dead to fm ; 
but that this is made vjfible by the fruits cf regeneration, or by the 
adions of the new creature ; but not by the opcratior ©f the Spirit, iR 
which he i» regenerated 



f 



Mr. Aujlin's Mijlakes. 21 

mi flakes entire ; then expofe them one by one. Mr. A. 
inliociuce.s and prefents them in the following manner. 

" In page 74, to my argument (fays I:e) Ircm your fup- 
pofed opinion, that many dying in infancy are faved, you 
reply in tliis manner : — • Perha];s your idea is this, That I 

If I undcrftar.d Mr. P.'s fcriflments, they arc, — l. That a natural man 
hath not one fpiritbany jiood tliOLj/ht a. 'Ihat regeneration is tffcdted 
\>y the fpccial agency oi the Holy Ghoft. 3. 'J Ijat the viani/ejl exerdfei 
«)f t}ic new creature are tlie tiuturul canftqutnccs of regeneration^ but are 
not thenifdvcft regeneration. 

'Jhcfe being hin kntimcnt?, then hie contraft is at war with them, as 
well as with the liible : for we do not, in rrgtncration, fliow ourfelvci^ 
♦lead to fin ; hut in the c<-nf<?ciurnt ads or friits of it, wc ftiow this. 

If thcfc obfcrvatior.3 be juft, Mr. P. had been more prudent had he 
kept hib Sermon to fcimfelf, and oprtfTcd lefsfcar left the /joor, fgnarantt 
and illiterate Baptifts fliould grtatly injure the caiife of Cl»iifl, by tnif- 
applhat'vTis i>{ ftriptare fij^utes. 

liut Mr. P. in his note, pages 143, 144, hath manifeftcd his mind to- 
te fo crowded with oppcffiti^n to the baptized cliurch, as to dt priv« him 
of hU ufual fprjghtlinelis of rcc* llcdion. J hus it hath happt-ncdto him, 
a» is common to thok who arc over zealous; they hdray thcmfeivcs, 
rather than foil their opponents. A« Mr P. hath, with no fmall rude- 
ncfs, cxpofcd himfelf, he cannot juftly take it unkindly to have his notf 
increale it« publicity. 1 fhall take liberty to tranfcrihc a few fcntencei^ 
of which I Ihould hayc thought Mr. P incapable. Should he publickly 
deny their being his, and prove his innotcncy, then will they be taken 
from his accouiit but the 7 look fo iike other parts of his Sermon,^ 
proof might he diffuuit, unlcfs he deny the whole. 

Says he, • Probably the (Baptift) denomination have received feme 
advanU'gc, in tl.c courfc of a century or two. from a few lolitary con- 
gregational pitacherii joining them, who had received diplomas from- 
iomc college. 1 hi»niuft, however, be one of their minor advantage* % 
for when was it known that the difiingu'ijhed mtmhers of a party dtftrtedf 
Men, con/ciouj of dicir injtriontj to tleir. brethren in literature a!id talentt^ 
have a poiverful temptation to apojiatize^ where their rclatii/e grealiujt. 
wi 1 be advanctd." 

A few queflions for the reader. 

r. Could Mr. P. had not his recolledlion betji ]«fl, hut liave called to 
mind, that the very apollk who wrote his text, was one of xhcic dcfertert f 

2. Did not Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, James, and Jude, 
all of them, defert their party, the Jewifli church, and join the Chriltian ? 

3. Did not Martin Luther and John Calvin defert their party, the 
Judaizcd and Judaizing church of Rome f 

4. Lid not all the etUorated reformers of the reformed church defert 
their party, and come out, in meafure, from the mrn of fin ? 

5. Did not all the leaders of the Congrej^ational and Prclbyterian 
denominations, when they broke off from the Church of Lngland, or 
from the communirn of the Pnjifts, defert their party } 

6. Were none of thefe, diftinguiftieU members of the party v hence 
they broke off? 

G r 



2 2 Second Expofition of 

believe fome infants, who have not been immerfed, may go 
to heaven, and be finally faved. This, Sir, I do believe. 
But what hath this to do with the prefent controverfy ?' 
It hath this to do with it, Sir ; it entirely refutes your 
hypothefis. You have no '■juarrant to believe any human 
being is faved, who is not to you a 'oifble member of the hing' 
dom of Ghrijl. This is the force of the argument, which )0U 
have not noticed at all. Your notion of holding people to 
be good people, and heirs of glory, who have no vifible 
place in the kingdom of God, is an outrage upon cominon 
fenfe, and a contradiction to the whole Bible. You exclude 
all infants, without exception, from this vifible kingdom j. 
the confequence is, that no warrant remains for you to 
confider any of them as faved. All the heirs of falvation 
are fpoken of as being fueh vifibly in this world. Ifalah 
Ixi. 9. And their feed fhall be known among the Gentiles, 
and their offspring among the people .: all that fee them 
fhall acknowledge them, that they are the feed which the 
Lord hath bleffed. Hundreds of other texts there are t(> 
the fame purpofe." ^ 

^ The reader will particularly notice my words, which 
gave occafion to Mr. A. to make the piiftakes which follow^ 
My words are, I believe fome infants, who have not beerv 
immerfed, may go to heaven and be finally faved. I then 
aik, But what hath this to do with the prefent controverfy ? 
His reply is, '* It hath this to. do with it ; it entirely refutes 
your hypothefis,'' The reader ihall know my hypothefis j 
it is this — No unbaptized perfon belongs to the nyifible church 
of Chrifl. This hypothefis, fays he, is entirely refuted by 
allowing, that fome chfldren, who have not been baptized,, 
or immerfed, and fo not in Chrift's 'oijihle church, may be 
finally faved. If this fentiment refute my hypothefis, then 
the old papiftical notion which Mr. A. hath adopted is 
true — That none but shier eh members can po/fibly be fxiiyed. This 
is one of his miftakes. 

Again, he fays, " You have no ivarrant to beh'eve, that 
any human being is faved, who is not to you a vifible 

7- Did not Mr P. in his aeal, fo forget himfclf^, as tadeaonnce all 
the famous leaders of his own and of all other denominations^, that he 
naight, not in a very becoming manner, aim his unkind fliafts againft a 
few folitary Congregational preachers, who have, to anfwer a good 
conference, dared to renounce the traditions of men, that they might 
keep the Commandments of the Lord ? 

I fhall now leave Mr. P. to his own reflexions, and the puVlic t» 
form their own judgment, upon fuck management as thi«« 



Mr, Anjiiris Miftakes. 23 . 

member of the kingdom of Chrift." I will here prefent 
my warrant. Gcd tells me, Rev. xviii. 4. that he hath 
people within the limits of Antichr'ijl'' s church. Thofe who 
are within the limits of Antichrift's church, are not to me^ 
nor ought they to be confidered by any, as members of the 
'otfihle church of Chrift. I have, therefoie, a warrant to 
believe that fome of thefe, w^ho are born of Chriil's Spirit, 
being within the limits of Babylon, and many of them 
living and dying there, not only may be faved, but mud be. 
This expofes anotljer of his miftakes. 

Again, fays he, " This is the force of the argument^ 
which you have not noticed at all.'^ What the force of 
the argument ? That none but vifible church members can 
be faved. Which, fays he, " you have not noticed at all.** 
Then it fhall be noticed ; for it is one of the firft-born fons 
of the church of Rome. The pope, moil affbredly, con- 
fiders himfelf and his church as the only church of Chrift^ 
and that none can be faved out of his hounds y hence it is 
lawful for him to kill all heretics, all who will not fubmit 
to his holy catholic church ; and to convert by fire and 
fword, as for many ages he did, the heathen nations to his 
religion, and compelled them to be members of his church, 
'J'hefe violent meafures may be greatly palliated, if the 
pope's fentiment be corred. It is, hov/ever, the fame with 
Mr. A.'s. Hence, if the force of Mr. A.'s argument be 
allowed, or the fentiment in which the force of it is, net 
one within the limits of Antichrirps kingdom, not one with- 
in the Mahometan countries, not one in any heathen nation^ 
can be faved. No, nor can one infant, from Adam's day 
to our's, have been faved ; nor can one adult, who may 
die at fea, where there is no Chriftian to behold him, nor 
one who may die in our own land, and is not known to be 
a Chriftian by others, be ever faved. For Mr. A. informs 
us, we have no warrant to believe that any are faved who 
are not members of Chrijl^s vjfible church ; and page 16, he 
tells us, that no man is a member of Chrift's vifible church, 
unlefs he is feen or knowm to be fo by others j, for, fays he, 
** A man's "jifihil'ity refpeEs nvhat he is in the eyes of others^" 
Hence, if Chrift ians do not know or confider us to be of 
their number, there can be no hope of our falvation. I 
will confider the force of this argument farther, when he 
fhall defire it. 

Again, fays our author, " Your notion of holding people 
to be good people, and heirs of glory, who have no vifible' 
place in the kingdom of God, is an outrage upon coraraois 



24 Second Expofitlon of 

fenfe, and a contradlcftion to the whole Bible.'* That i*s, 
my notion that any are converted before they belong to the 
infihle church of Chrill, and that there are any of his holy 
or regenerated people, who do not belong to this church 
of Chrift, is an outrage upon common fenfe, and a contra- 
di<5tion to the whole Bible. I venture to fay, that all the 
genuine common fenfe which there is in the world, will fet, 
down this charge of Mr. A.*s as one of his mlflakes, Be- 
fides, I will venture to fay a little farther, that I know cf 
no denomination of prcfeffed Chriftians, in any part of the 
globe, fave his holinefs the pope and his blinded and big- 
goted adherents, who are in fentiment with Mr. A. Yes, 
and the Bible no where intimates, that my notion rs errone- 
ous, or that his is corred ; but, on the other hand, it every 
where, when the fubje^fl is mentioned, teftifies that my 
notion is according to truth, and that hts is a miftake, not 
to fay a deluiion. The preaching of John was, that the 
people {hould repent and be converted, for the kingdom of 
heaven, the vifible church of Chrjlft, was at hand ; other- 
wife, they would not be prepared to join it. The plain, 
the iimple, the unequivocal idea is, that they muft be con- 
verted to God, before they were fit fubjefls, or prepared to 
Join the vifible church of Chriil. 1 he preaching of Jefus 
Chrift vf^h the fame, and he fpake and ftill fpeaks the fame 
language. The broad commiflion which our Lord gave 
his difcipics V as, that they fhould teach, and fo teach that 
their hearers fnould become "difciples, behevers, and con- 
verted perfons ; and thrs too before they were to bapti/e 
them, or to receive them into the Trfhle church of Chrift.. 
Thofe who were thus converted v/ere, as we are told in the 
Ads of the Apoftles, added to the church daily. Befides, 
the Bible fpeaks of God's having people, who are not only 
out of Chrift's vifihle church, but within the limits of Anti- 
chrifi's, Rev. xviii. 

Again, Mr. A. goes on, and tells me, faying, " You ex- 
clude all infants, witliout exception, from this vifible king- 
dom." Certainly, and who told him to put them in ? He 
adds, " The confequence is, that no warrant remains for 
you to confider any of them as faved." This confequence 
is another^ o^ h\s mijlakes. There is no connexion betw'een 
his p?emife and conclufion. 

Once more, fays be, " All the heirs of falvation are 
fpoken of as being fuch vifibly in this world.'* This alfo 
is one of his miftakes. But he has attempted to prove it; 
Let U3 hear liis evidence. " Ifaiab Ixi. 9. And their {q^A 



Mr. Aujiin's Mijiakes. 2j 

iliall be known among the Gentiles, and their offspring 
among the people : all that fee them fhall acknowledge 
them, that they are the feed which the Lord hath blefled. 
Hundreds of other texts there are to the fame purpofe." 
To what purpofe ? To prove that none fhall be faved, but 
fuch as belong to the vifihk church of Chrift on earth ? 
This text fays no fuch thing ; yet he fays, " Hundreds of 
other texts there are to the fame purpofe." Truly, there 
are ; but nxrhere is there one to his purpofe ? Not a fmgle 
text, from Genefis to Revelation, which gives him the leaft 
countenance. 

Thefe miftakes, which have been now mentioned, may 
be taken by the reader as a fample for the reft ; indeed, 
his pamphlet is little elfe but one great mijiake. 

Should Mr. A. take advantage, bccaufe I have not ex- 
pofed all his miftakes, and hereafter pretend that I admit 
one fentence of his erroneous ftatements to be true, becaufe 
I have not in particular expofed the whole, I may, if the 
Lord will, at fome future time, unmafk the reft ; but for 
tlie prefent w-e will turn our attention to two or three of 
his mifreprefentations. 

I. The firft which I fhall notice is in page 14, where> 
fpeaking of the 'v'lfihk church of Chrift, his words are^ 
** Your breaking up of the church of Chri'ft into little petty 
detachments, and making it neceflary for a man to become 
incorporated into one of them, in order to his being a mem- 
ber of that church, is unfcriptural.'* The whole of this is 
a fheer mifreprefentation. What the good man meant, or 
can honeftly mean, I know not. If he mean, that it is un- 
fcriptural to hold the church of Chrift hath many branches^ 
fuch as, the church of Corinth, the church of Ephefus, the 
church of Colofte, the church in the houfe of Philemon, &c. 
is unfcriptural, then he w^ould have us lelie've that the B'lhle 
is unfcriptural. If he would have us believe it to be un- 
fcriptural, to hold that a perfon muft be incorporated into 
a particular branch of Chrift's church, in order to his being 
a member of that branch, then he would teach us that the 
fcriptures are not confiftent with com.mon fenfe. If he 
intend to convey to the public this idea, — that I make it 
neceftary for a perfon to be incorporated into fome partic-^ 
ular branch of Chrift's church, in order to his being a member 
of his ivfihle church, this is mere mifreprefentation ; I have 
no fuch fentiment ; 1 have, to my knowledge, advocated 
nothing which looks like it. My fentiment is, that when a 
perfon is baptized upf?n a proftffion of faith he belongs to 



26 Second Eicpofiiion of 

Chri/l's vlfible church. This is what I told him in the 22 J 
page of mj Letters to him. He has eitlier niilieprefenteJ 
the fcriptures, and taught us to believe that they are un* 
fcriptural and contrary from common fenfe, or he has mif- 
repiefented my fentiment, which I have publickly and fully 
exprefled. 

2. His next mifreprefentatic n which is to be noticed, is 
ill his lith page; it is contained in his anAver to a pallage 
which he quoted from the 20th pi;ge of my Letters to him. 
I will give the public the paifage, together with the re- 
mainder of the paragraph. It is this — * The manner (fay 
1 to him) in which ^om throiu the olje^ion before tlie public, 
has a very natural tendency to give an incautious reader a 
very unjuft idea of the tendency of my principles. He 
"would naturally enough conclude, that I muft, if confident 
with myfeif, believe that no one except the Baptifts has 
any religion ; that I confider and treat all others as being 
impenitent and ungodly ; yes, as being profligate and unrc- 
generate. A more unjuft idea could not be communicated ; 
fuch an idea is not only inconfiftent with my principles, but 
they forbid iiny perfon's fuggefting that fuch an idea could 
fairly be deduced from them. One of oiir principles in, 
that no perfon is a fit fubjed of baptifm, unlefs he be a 
penitent, a godly, a regenerate perfon.' 

To this Mr. A. faw fit to reply, in the words following : 
" No, Sir, it has a tendency to give a jujl idea of the ten- 
dency of your principle ; you yourfelf could not be hlind 
X.O \h\s tendency^ for you call it natural. He would, indeed, 
naturally enough conclude, that you muft, if confident with 
yourfelf, believe that none except the Jiaptifts have any 
religion." Then, to complete the matter, he adds one of 
his fophifms, to prove that he had (ione v.'ell. Both his 
mifreprefentation and fophifm mutt be here expofed. 

"The manner in which he threw his objection before the 
public (he fays) has a tendency to give a juft idea of the 
tendency of your principles. You could not (continues he) 
be blind to this tendency^ for you call it naturaL^^ Here he 
perverts my words, and makes me fay juft what I denied, 
or juft the contrary from what I faid. WTiat I told hirn 
was, ** that the manner in which he threw the cljeclkn before 
the public, has a very natural tendency to give an incautious 
reader a 'very unjuji id^a ci the tendenry of my principles." 
He tells the public, that it has a tendency to give a jnjl idea^ 
and th<xt 1 ciil it a natural tendency. That is, he tells the 
public ibal I aiicw that the md-r.mr In which be threw the 



Mr. AufiirCs Mijiaka. 27 

objcdion before them has a natural tendency to givfe a jujl 
idea of my principles ; wherea> 1 told liinrj it }iaJ a v^rj> 
natural tendency to give a v^ry ««/V//^ uU-a of tlifm. Such 
management will afford but little credit even to a bad 
caufe. 

But we will attend to his fophifm, by which he would 
prove the whok*. Say, he, " Nothing is plainer, tlian that 
you have no warrant to believe a perfon ha'< ariy religion 
who has not the vjjtbility of rel'i^'um,''* Certainly, wc have 
no warrant to believe that a perfon has any religion wl»o 
has no appearance of it. But what hath this to do with 
the prefent debate ? Hov/ does it prove, that, to be con- 
fiftent with my principles, I muft believe that none has 
religion but the Baptifls, when Trvj principles are, that no 
one can honeftly become a Baptift, or a baj>ti/ed profefP^r, 
unlefs he be prevtoujly a pojp^or of religion. Mr. A, 1$ 
cither afraid to know the principles of tlje B^plids, (tr he 
cannot underRand U'en^j, or he will not; for if he can and 
would know them, then he could rx'A. hont-flly maki; fo 
many miftakcs about them. 

3. I will mention but one m^^e of htfc mifrepreienta- 
tions, and that is in page 31, in which he preicnti to x)u: 
public ceruin fcntimcnts, and n^refent* tliCiri as bein^ 
mine, wliereas they are u/me of his o*.vn, which 1 put U*- 
gether ifjr hii ini\jtctUm. He has inr(>t-<5ted (Jtu: |»ariic'jlar, 
and iays of it thu« : ♦* You make (fay* h') Uie (Irongeft 
applxatton of tliis imaginable. You fay, to be buried vrijl 
Chrift in baptifrri, to be planted in tlie li ker^efi </f iih iient}ty 

nd to be 3L:fen v.ith him in baptifrri, Kom. vi. 4^ 5. arid 
^oL ii. 12. ii to be baptized with tJie Holy Ghoft, t/r the 

aptifm of t^iC Holy Ghoft ez^t-Hly uAnc'idL% with tlii* rep- 
rcfentation." Thefe fentiment* arc by m> meai,* mtj;^ ; I 
believe no fucL thing. To flix/w the reader Mr, A/» mif^ 
reprefefitatior^ and ti;at the ftrar,ge wf/rk tl at be aUiibutet 
to Hie is his, I will preient tJie ab'.ve jKiilage with itt cou- 
rieiion, as let down in pagei. 30, 3 j, of my J^^ttert. 

I obferved to hire thus : — * Speakir>g of Kom. vi. a^ jou 
fay, page 45, " The fpiritual, internal iMp*Mhi <A iht Holy 
Gboft, eza/^/ co;f.cid/ri V. ith tl^e whole of h^'- (ir^ ap^xi- 
tle^s) reprefejitatioTi, and invariably prodtices thi; efieat },c 
zrjentkjn*." 

« la page 4%, fpcaking of CoL iL J2. jr^r word* are^ 
^' It is ja& like tl^ other/' I e. tt u jcii like the abtn^ 
^ ai&ge, &om. yL 4. 



a 8 Second Expo/it ion cf 

' In the pafTage which we have been juft confidering, 
pages 33, 34, you tell us, " Water baptifm is undoubtedly 
a fymbol of the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft, which is a 
figurative baptifm;'* pages 60, 61. 

* In page 60, you have thefe words,—" There muft be 
fome evident likenefs between the fubje(5l to which a word 
IS applied, in the natural and primitive ufe of it, and the 
fubjea to which it is applied as a fgure ; otherwife there is 
a grofs impropriety in the figurative ufe of it." 

•Now, Sir, (faid I) permit me to put thefe ideas, con- 
ceffions, and declarations of yours together. 

* I. To be buried with Chrift in baptifm, to be planted 
in the likenefs of his death, to be buried with him by bap- 
tifm, Rom. vi. 4, 5. and Col. ii. 12. is to be baptized with 
the Holy Ghoft ; or the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft ex- 
a^ly coincides with this reprefentation. 

* 2. There is an evident likenefs between the natural 
idea of planting, burring, and rifing as from the dead, and 
the figurative baptifm of the Holy Ghoft, or there is a grofs 
impropriety (as you fay) In the apoftle's figurative ufe of 
the words. 

* 3. Water baptifm is a fymbol or figure of tlie baptifm 
of the Holy Ghoft ; it is, therefore, a burying, a planting, 
or immerfion, your Letters as well as the word of God 
being judge. 

'Hence, Sir, (faid I) by going a large diftance round, 
to avoid what you feared, you have proved to my hand 
what I endeavoured to eftablifh through the courfe of five 
fermons.' 

The reader will now judge who it was that tnacle the 
ftrongeft application imaginabley and whether it be not a mif- 
reprefentation for Mr. A. to palm his erroneous fentiments 
upon the public as being mine ? 

But fays Mr. A. " 1 obferved to you, that the things 
compared by the apoftle were, our death to fm with Chrift's 
natural death, our fpiritual burial with his burial, and our 
rifiiig to newnefs of life with his refurredlion. In the lan- 
guage of the apoftle, the baptifm he fpeaks of is diftin- 
guilhable from the burial, the latter being in or by the 
iormer. I repeat it, and beg you would not overlook the 
diftinction. I take thef« things, our death, burial, and ref- 
urrection, to be effects, and baptifm the caufe." 

As Mr. A. begs me not to overlook the diftin<5lion be- 
tween effe<5ls and caufe, I will not, but attend to it j- and 



Mr. Aiijlin's Mi/lakes. 29 

ihen we fli;ill fee if his caufe looks any the belter for be- 
ing attended to. 

He informs us, firft, Thrct death to fm, fpiritual burial, 
and rifing again to newnefs of life, are the effecfls of bap- 
tifm. 

Second, That water baptifm has fome evident likenefs to 
the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft, or to regeneration, which 
produces thefe effeds, death to fm, fpiritual burial, and 
refurreclion to newnefs of life. 

Third, That the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft is the caufe 
of our death to fin, fpiritual burial, and refurreclion to new- 
nefs of life, and 'water baptifm lias fome evident likenefs to it. 

Now I aik the reader, and am willing Mr. A. (hould 
hear me, firft. What likenefs is there between infant fprink- 
iing, or affufion, and what he calls the baptifm of the Holy 
Ghoft, or a being born of the Spirit, which, fays he, is the 
caufe of fpiritual death, burial and refurreclion ? Is there 
any likenefs between them? Chrift afiures us that we know 
not boiv the Spirit goesj or comes, in regeneration ; there 
can, therefore, be no evident likenefs. There muft, 
however, be fome evident likenefs between the baptifm 
of the Holy Ghoft, or regeneration, and the fprinkling 
or pouring water on an infant ; or one of thefe two things 
is true ; either, firft, Tlie apoftle was guilty of a grofs im- 
propriety in likening them together ; or, fecondly, He has 
not likened them together, as Mr. A. tells us that he has. 
If the apoftle have not compared or likened them together, 
then infant fprinkling, or aft'ufion, is not gofpel baptifm, or 
elfe one of the following things is true ; either, firft. There 
is no likenefs between water baptifm and the baptifm of the 
Holy Ghoft, as Mr. A. tells us tliere is ; or, fecondly, The 
apoftle, in Rom. vi. 4, and Col. ii. 12, isnotfpeaking of the 
baptifm of the Holy Ghofi, where Mr. A. fays he is. Hence, 
Mr, A. hath not lold us the truth, or wf:nt fprinkling and 
affufion are not gofpel baptifm. Befides, no perfon, in the 
full ufe of his reafon, can lay there is even the hafl lilenefs 
between putting a Fittle 'water upon a chilcPs face, and the pro- 
dudion of a natural death, burial and refurrcftion. Mr. A. 
then has but this alternative, either to relinquifh his bad 
caufe as loft, or confefs his wrong ftatements, forfake his 
erroneous pofitions, take new ground, and fet out afrefh. 
No wonder Mr. A. .tells us, tliat, if we write again, our 
performances will not be entitled to notice, unlefs we bring 
ibmething new, or give the controverfy a new turn. For, 
I confefs, were I on his ground, I fhould prefer any new 

D 



30 Second Expofition of 

tiling, and any new turn, rather than have th^ old, tried 
fubftantlal truths brought againfl: me again. 

2d, But I have another queftion to put to the reader. 
It Is this. Does your Bible fay, in any one place, fo much 
as one word about haptijm., (whether the baptifra of water orof 
the Holy Gholi) as being the caufe of death to fm, fpiritual 
burial, (unlefs the houfe being filled, on the day of Pente- 
coft, with the divine prefence and glory, might be thus 
termed) or of refurredion to newnefs of life ? It muft fay 
thus fomeiuheret or this muft be the lentiment of the Bible, 
or Mr. A. hath made another great mtjlake, and was hardly 
prudent In begging me to notice it. Should he fay, that, 
on the day of Pfintecoft, the apoftles were fpiritually bu- 
ried, that is, they were immerfed, or overwhelmed in the 
ever memorable affufions of the Spirit, then he becomes a 
Baptifl; at once ; for he fays, water baptifm is a fymbol, or 
figure of it. But, if he fay, that he intends, by the bap- 
tifm of the Holy Ghoft, his regenerating influences, then I 
have another queftion to put to the reader — 

7,^, Does your Bible ever fpeak of regeneration, or con- 
verfion, as being the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft ? It ap- 
pears, that Mr. A. and his brethren have gotten a kind of 
baptifm of their own ; a kind of baptifm of the Holy 
Ghoft, which contradi(51s the Bible account of that baptifm, 
nearly as much as do their fprinkling and affafion for bap- 
tifm. This they appear to have invented, to juftify them 
for fetting afide the gofpel water baptifm. Thus has it fre- 
quently happened, fuch, as venture to depart from the 
good old Bible way, are conftrained to invent fome new 
errors to cover their old ones. 

I wifh to make a few obfervations, and then fhall quit 
this part of my reply to Mr. A, 

1. I vifh to know of Wm, or of any of his brethren, 
who told them, that to be dead to fm is to be baptized of 
the Jioly Ghoft ? Rom. vi. 2. 

2. I wifh to know of any of them, if they be able to tell 
me, who gave them the information, that to be baptized in- 
to Jefus Chrift is to be baptized into the Holy Ghoft, and 
wi?h the Holy Ghoft \ Rom. vi. 3. 

3. I wllh to know whether, according to their notion 
of infant baptifm, their children are not baptized into Jefus 
Chrift ; and then whether all their children are baptized 
with the Holy Ghoft ? For fays Paul, So many of us as 
were baptized into Jefus Chrift were baptized into his 
death. 



Mn Auftin^s Miftakes. 31 

4. I vvli"h to be informed by nny of them, who told them, 
and how they obtained their information, that to be buried 
with Chritl by baptifm into death is the fame as being bap- 
tised with the Holy Ghoft ? Of, to pleafe Mr. A. I will ftate 
the queftion a little differently. Who told him and his 
brethren, that the effecft of being baptized with the Holy 
Ghoft is to be buried nv'ith Chr'tjl by baptifm P For fays Paul, 
Rom. vi. 4, We are buried with him by baptifm into death. 
He does not, however, fay a word of this being the effe^ of 
the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft. 

5. I deiire to know who told them, that to walk in new- 
ness of life was to be baptized witli the Holy Ghoft, or 
was the effed of this baptifm ? Rom. vi. 4. For fays Mr. A. 
" the fpiritual, internal, baptifm of the Holy Ghoft exactly 
coincides with the whole of this reprefentation." Rom. 
vi. I — 6. 

6. I wifh to know of Mr. A. or of any of hi,s brethren, 
whether Peter, John, James, and the reft of the holy breth- 
ren, who were affembled in Jerufalem, on the memorable 
morning of Pentecoft, were baptized tivics by the baptifm 
of the Holy Ghoft ? For they were raifed to nuivrifs of life, 
long before that morning arofe ; and Mr. A. tells us, that 
to be rrt;/f</to ue-vnfs of life is the efle.^ of the bapti.m of 
the Koiy Guolt. i'liey mua ihurtrhirc h:ive \yz^Y\\\:v^' bap- 
tized long before, or die ej'ed muft have preceded ti-e c\,\i -..■. 
To unde'rftand which would puzzle Mr. A. as muiih as -t 
did Prefident Edwards to underftand the felf-determining 
power in the Arminians. This, howLr,'er, muft be under- 
ftood and explained, or elfe they will not be able to clear 
themfelves from the herefy o£ fpiritual anahaptifm. For none 
of them will dare deny, but the difciples were baptized 
with the Holy Ghoft, on the moniing of that memorable 
day, when thoufands were converted under Peter's fer- 
raon. 

7. I wifti to know who told thefe good men, that to be 
planted in the likenefs of Chrift's death in baptifm is the 
baptifm of the Holy Ghoft, or is the effect of it ? 

8. I wifti to know of Mr. A. or of any of his brethren, 
who told them, that to be buried with Chrift in baptifm is 
to be baptised in the Holy Ghoji^ or is the ejfecl of this bap- 
tifm ? Col. ii. J 2. 

9. I defire to know of them, who gave them authority 
to fay and teach thefe things ? We find not a word of all 
this matter in all the Bible. If they would, any of them. 
be confidered as minifters of Chrift, they fhould teach what 



32 Second Eicpofttion of 

he hath commanded them, and not be amufing their hear- 
ers and the public with fuch vain things, and for a purpole 
flill more vain, to pervert the gofpei of Chrift, or, at beft, 
its firft. ordinance and the fubjec5ts of it. 

Perhaps Mr. A. will not again beg me to attend to his 
diflinclions ; but I fhall, if tlie Lord give me opportunity, 
unlefs he and his brethren ceafe to pervert the Scriptures as 
tliey have hitherto done. 

We Oiall now lake under confideration fome other things, 
which, in Mr. A. 's Letters need correction. It may furprife 
the public, that a man of Mr. A.*s chara6ler, and good 
{^\]!^Q^ fhould mifs the truth at every ftep. But when it is 
confidered, that the fide which he defends is nothing but 
falfehood and error, the furprife vanifhes, and It would 
have be^n Unaccountable, had he done otherwife, and yet 
been confiftent with himfelf and caufe. 

Such as continue in their errors will, no doubt, be dif- 
pleafed with me for expofing him and them, and will pro- 
bably wifh to hear no more of the controverfy. But fo 
long as truth is better than error, and the command con- 
tinues, to contend earneftly for the faith which was once 
delivered to the faints ; fo long muft the errors of the er^ 
roneous be expofed. 

Scvic of the remaining errors in ;.!r. A.'s Letters, which 
need curredior:, are ihe ibiiowing : 

I. S;iys he to n e p. 7, " Your third Letter to me is now 
to cfime under conlideration. 

" In the beginning of this Letter, you make pretenGons 
to candour and fairnefs, but renounce them both at the ve- 
ry next ftep." 

I think myfelf happy, that I may anfwer for myfelf, and 
the public ihall fee how I renounce candour and fairnefs^ 
He gives the following for evidence. *' For (fays he) you 
make me to nraintain that manifeft unbelievers are proper 
and gofpel fubjecls of baptifm. Thefe are your iv or ds again, 
I have faid no fuch thing" This is Mr. A.'s accufation ; 
and I appeal to the Bible, to flubborn fa^ls, and to com- 
mon fenfe, if he have not faid the whole which I have laid 
to his charge ; and whether he have not denied the plain 
matter of fa(ft, that he m.ight excufe himfelf, -and charge 
me with renouncing candour -And fairnefs ? 

Says Mr. A. " What I maintain is, that the infants of 
vlfible believers are gofpel fubjeifls of baptiim." 

We appeal to the Bible, if infants of vifible believers, 
as well as others, be not manifc/JIy unbelieven ? That informs 



Mr. Aujim''s M't/^a^m 53 

Qs, that man is born like a tutld afs''s^ colt. It does not' ex- 
empt believers' children any more than others. Befides 
lavs our Saviour, Except a man be born again, he cannot 
fee the kingdom of God. Is Mr. A. an Arminlan, or a 
Wefleyan Methodill, and fo has. he adopted the inventions 
of men to pervert thefc texts ? If he have, ilill I will fhow 
the public, that he laas denied a plain fa<fl, to get rid of 
a difficulty. For, in the fame page^ and in- the preceding, 
he, fpeaking of the jailer, and of his houfehold,^ charges me 
with prejumptuous comments^ which,, fays he, are calculated to 
make your unlearned readers conclude, that the jailer* i 
hovfekold are faid to be believers as well as himfelf. Where- 
as the evidence from the ufe of this participle is quite the 
othej^ <way" Here Mr. A. informs us, that the jailer's 
houfehold were baptized, when they did not believe ; and 
charges me with prefumptuous comments, becaufe I held 
with the plain Scripture account of the matter, that the 
jailer rejoiced, believing in God with all his houfe. Mr.. 
A. holds that the houfehold of the jailer was baptized^ 
while they were unbelievers, and that thisis ajuftification of 
his and his brethren's pra<ftice. Now I appeal to the 
common fenfe of all men, if unbelieving houfebolds, or if the 
unbelieving members of a manifejlly unbelieving houfehold be not 
manifejl unbelievers. If they be, then Mr. A. holds, that 
manifejl unbelievers iire proper and gojpel JubjeSs of baptifm / 
or elle he charges the Apoftles with baptizing improper 
and ungofpel fubjects. For he holds, that they baptized 
fuch, and charges me with prefumptuous comments^ where I 
thow, th;Lt they did not baptize fuch unfit and improper 
fubje«5ls. I now appeal to every man, who has common 
fenie, whethejr Mr. A. has not contradicfled plain matter of 
fadl ; denied his own fentiment, and charged me unjuftly ; 
and all this to get rid of a difficulty into which his errors 
have brought him ; and whether he does not hold to the 
unfcriptural and popifli fentrment, that manifejl unbelievers 
are proper and gofpel fiibjeSs of baptifm. ? 

2. In page 21, fays Mr. A. to me, " In p. 17, you make 
a very unfair ftatement» You fay,. *^ Befides it is your fen- 
timent, that baptifm is to be obferved, or received, wh.^n 
we are infants; when we know nothing about it. How 
much ferious reverence and confcientioufnefs infants have, 
we know not 1' Is this fair ? Is. it hone ft I You have omitted 
to mention our adult baptifras entirely."' Truly, I have 
emitted it, but will now mention it, and expofe the whole 
bufmefs. 

o % 



34 Second Expofttion of 

I. Mr. A/s fentiment is exa<5lly as I fat It down ; but 
I did not expofe the wliole. For his fentiment Is, as I ob- 
ferved, that baptifm is to be received, when we are infants, 
when we know nothing about it. He holds, that this 
ought to be the cafe univerfally, in all Chriftian lands. 
For it is his fentiment, that all parents, where the gofpel 
is preached, ought to be believers, when their children are 
born ; and that all fuch children ought to be baptized or 
fprinkled in their infancy. Thus he holds, that, in gofpel 
lands, all ought to be baptized before they believe ; and 
that none fhould be taught till after they are baptized. 
Juft the contrary from what Chrift commanded, and the 
Scriptures every where teach. Thus we fee, could hij 
error have its perfed work, how ferioufly they would rev- 
erence, and how confcientioufly they would obferve the 
gofpel ordinance of baptifm. They would fo reverence it, 
and fo confcientioufly obferve it, that not a fmgle believer 
in the whole nation Ihnuld have the privilege to fubmit to it 
according to the exprefs command of our Saviour. No 
one fhould be taught, and then baptized ; but all fliould be 
baptized, and then taught. 

But, 2d. Says he, *' You have omitted our adult bap^ 
tifms entirely.'* I have ; but will be faulty in this partic- 
ular no longer. Now, for their adult baptifras. What 
are they ? The reader fhall hear, and then will never for- 
get them. Their adult baptilms are, when a mafter of ^ 
family is converted, his houfehold of adult impenitents 
muft be baptized as well as the believing mafter. This is 
Mr. A.'s^nnciple, and if he will not acknowledge it, I will 
prove it to him. He tells us, that the Philippian jailer be- 
lieved, that his houfehold did not, and yet, that they were 
proper fubje<5ts of baptifm ; and that the baptifms of fuch 
unbelieving houfeholds are their adult baptifms. Thefe 
^re not }aft his words, but thefe are his fentiments, not de- 
-duced from his principles, but from his declarations and 
^fiertions, as the reader may fee by confulting his Letters to 
the author. Befides, this is juft in agreement with their 
principles. If they deny this, they give up their princi^ 
pies, and ftand upon nothing. They have no other de- 
fcription of adult baptifms belonging to their fyftem ; un- 
lefs in fbme rare inftances, a heathen bachelor or maid, 
without a family, might be converted, an4 then fuch an 
Sidult might be a<imitted to fprinkling. 

The public are now defired. to judge, with what propri- 
•ety Mr. A. afferted, in his firft Letters, faying, " We as 



Mr, All/tins Mijlakes. 35 

ferioufly reverence, and confcientiouily obferve the gofpel 
ordinance of baptifm, as do the Baptifts." Upon this, I oh- 
ferved to him, that it vas his fentiment, that this ordinance 
is to be obrerved or received when we are infants, when we 
can know nothing about it. How much ferious reverence 
and confcientioufnefs infants have, we know not. To this 
he replies, " Is this fair ? Is it hone (I ?" Yes^ and I, appeal 
to the Bible and to the common fenfe of the public, if the 
whole truth, fairly laid open, would pot have made him ap- 
pear more erroneous, and given his fentiments a worfe hue^ 
But as he hath, fa.id, " Is, this fair { Is it honeft ?" he is now 
defired to inform the public how much ferious reverence, and 
confcientioufnefs the infidel, or unbelieving houfeholds of con- 
verted mailers, or parents have ? H^ve unbelieving adults, 
whofe hearts are hardened by experience in wickednefs, any 
more ferious reverence or confcientioufnefs, in fubmitting 
to baptifm> at the command of their mafter, or of the offi- 
ciating prieft, than have infants of a day old ? Suppofe 
the jail-keeper in Worcefter be converted, and his family, 
or houfehold, confift of half a dozen of unbelieving adults, 
with how much ferious reverence and confcientioufnefs 
would they obferve the gofpel ordinance of baptifm? 
Should they fubmit to be fprinkled, or partially walhed, 
or have water poured upon them, or have water applied to 
them in fome other way, which Mr. A., might fancy to be 
gofpel baptifm, then might the fpeiflators, behold one of his 
adult baptifnis, which he fays I have omitted entirely, I 
confefs, did I hold to fuch adult baptifms, and did my op- 
ponent negletft to mention them, I would never complain " 
of fuch omiffion, unlefs my judgment were what it is not, 
or I wiihed my fentiments to be had in everlailing re- 
proach. 

Let the Bible dotflrlne of gofpel baptifm, let the Bible 
fa6ts, relating to gofpel baptifm, let common fenfe, as to 
gofpel baptifm, judge whether Mr. A.'s adult baptifms be 
any way preferable before the heathen rites, pra<5lifed in 
honour of Jupiter,, or of other heathen gods ! The Bible 
knows nothing about fuch adult baptifms, as he and his 
brethren advocate. The facfl is, they have loll the idea of 
gofpel baptifm, and of the fubje(5ls too ;. and now confider 
themfelves juftifi,ed in contending earneftly for the com- 
mandments and traditions of men^. 

3. Says Mr.. A. page 26, "There are fome men, (Ir, 
who have not a jot of oil, nor a grain of balm, in their 
velfels, who yet have infinite zeal about things of compar- 



36 Second Expofition of 

ative irtJifFerence. The lefs determiaate evidence there h^ 
the more pofitive do they feem to be/* By the connexion 
in which this palTage is introduced, it is manifefl that the 
Baptifls are intended. But we appeal to the public, if Mr.. 
A. have not miilalcen their characleriftics. " Infinite zeal. 
(fays he) about things of comparaiive inditierence.** Wlio. 
more zealous than Mr. A. and his brethren^ about baptifm I 
Yet they, efpecially he, confefs it to be of fuch compiirative 
indifference, that it may be adminiilered at one time, or at 
another time, or at no time ; and tbi;t it may be in oue ivavy 
or in another way, or in almojl any way. It is not thus with, 
the Baptifts. " I he lefs determinate evidence (fays he); 
there is, the more pofitive do they feem to be." Nothing- 
can better apply to Mr. A. than does this ; for I fhowed 
him, in my Letters, that he had no determinate evidence, 
nor even probable evidence, in favour of his errors ; yet 
he is, if poffible, more pofitive than before. " Tliey plant 
themfelves (fays he) on an elevation enveloped in vapours, 
and yet fancy that they only have the feeing faculty." We- 
can fee, that to be baptized in the river, is luot to be fprink- 
led out of it. We can fee, that to have our bodies ivrjhed 
with pure or fimple water, is a different thing from having 
a little put upon our faces. We can fee, that for converts. 
to be baptized when they hear the word gladly, is not die 
lame as to be fprinkled before they can underftand one- 
word from another. We can fee fx:)me difference between, 
burying believers with Chrift in the very folemn and fig- 
nificant ordinance of baptifm, and. the fprlnkhng or pour- 
ing water on auult infidels becaufe their mafters believe. 
We do not claim exclufive poffefllon of the feeing faculty :. 
we believe Mr. A. has it, but with relation to. gofpel bap- 
tifm, will not ufe it. 

Again, fays he, "They make a thoufimd times more 
fufs about the mode of a thing, about converfion. to that 
mode, and the putting in pradice that mode, waiting 
months to give it publicity, and fending from. Dan to 
Beerfheba for agents to be employed about it, than if all 
the inhabitants of Louifiana were converted to Chriftian- 
ity." ! 1 This we believe to be a very rafh. untruth, of 
which Mr. A. muft repent in the prefent or future world. 

4. The public will excufe me, though in this place i 
may prefent them j^'ith a quotation, of unufual length. In- 
my judgment, k is expedient, in the prefent debate, to be 
liberal in quotations. My reafons are two : one i^, that 
my opponents fliall have no plaufiUe obje<Stion to make,. 



Mr, Aujlins Mijlakes, 37 

that their fentiment is not fairly ftateJ ; the other is, tliat 
then very many of my readers will difcover for themfelves 
the fallacy and weaknefs of my opponents* arguments, by 
infpe«5lion, before they are particularly expofed. It would 
pleafe me well to be ufej in the fame way ; then v/ould 
the readers, on both fides of the quellion, pofTefs a more 
generous opportunity to know the truth : but thofe who 
contend with me will ufe their pleafure in this matter. 

The quotation is in pages 37 and 38, and in the follow- 
ing words : — 

" The fecond proof which I advanced againft your doc- 
trine of the exclufive meaning of the word laptlzo, is the 
paifage in i Cor. x. 2, /^.nd were all baptized unto Mofes 
in the cloud and ia the fea. Here your reply is founded 
altogetlier on the force of the prepc^.itions under, throvgh, and 
in. Prepofitions are cv'^rj thing with you. But how are 
we to underhand them ? Beyond all doubt, the declaration 
of the apoille is founded upon the fa(ft in the Mofaic narra- 
tive. This you have not dared to look in the face. You 
ikulk under prepofitions, in the hope they will Ihield you 
from the eyes of thofe who are able to detect your fophifms. 
But you mud come out. You have committed yourfelf 
before the public. You have impofed on the credulity of 
our unlearned readers, by indefenfible afTertions, which 
ou do net fupport, and muic be rebuked for your senjcrity. 
riiis text alone is fufiicient to confound all thafe aiTertions. 
The apoftle fpeaks of the whole multitude of Ifrael, and 
comprehends every individual. All our fathers. Now 
will you undertake to fay before the public, that all thefe 
fatliers, individually, were immerfed in the cloud, when the 
facred narrative fays, Exod. xiv. 19, And the pillar of the 
:!oud went from before their face and ftood behind them ; 
- nd it came between the camp of the Egyptians and the 
camp of Ifrael ? Will you fay that they VN^ere individually 
immerfed in the fea, when the facred narrative is, verfe 22, 
And the children of Ifrael went into the mid ft of the fea 
upon dry ground, and the v/aters were a wall unto them 
en their right hand and on their left. If by the fea be 
mean^ tl.e bed of the waters, that was dry ground under 
their feet ; if the waters themfelves, they were on each fide 
:.f the congregation as a wall." 

1 will here, in the fir ft place, give the public a particular 
ftatement of the facts which caufed the good ma^^to fpeak 
fo fmartly, and to afTert things fo roundly, and then I (hall 



38 Second Expofition of 

endeavour to expofe his errors, with which the quotation is 
crowded. 

The accurate flatement now follows. In his firft Let- 
ters to me, page 57, his words are, " Another cafe in 
which the word baptizo is undeniably ufed to convey an 
idea entirely different from that of complete immerfion, 
and which, for fome reafon befl known to yourfelf, you 
have thought proper to omit, occurs in i Cor. x. 2, And 
were all baptized [ehapttzanto) unto Mofes in the cloud and 
in the fea." To this I replied, page 42, thus : — " Here 
let Paul explain himfelf, or let the preceding verfe explain 
what this means. The preceding verfe is, Moreover, breth- 
ren, I would not that ye fhould be ignorant, how that all our 
fathers were under the c/ouJj and all palfed through the fea. 
Then follows verfe 2, And were all baptized unto Mofes in 
the cloud and in the fea. How does this undeniably convey 
an idea entirely different from that of complete immerfion ? 
It looks to me fomewhat like the fame idea. It certainly 
has the appearance of being overwhelmed, or completely 
encompalfed. They were all under the cloud, they all 
palfed through the fea ; they were baptized in the cloud and 
in the fea. This your undeniable evidence againfl the idea 
of immevfion, appears, upon tlie very face of it, to favour,, 
ftrongly to favour, the very truth which you brought it to 
deftroy." 

We will now attend to the errors which he hath given us 
within, the limits of one paragraph. 

1. " Here (fays he) your reply is founded altogether 
upon tlie force of prepofitions." 

AnJ<wer, The force of my reply was founded upon the 
words of the apoftle ; I was dilpofed to let him explain 
himfelf. Mofes faid nothing about baptifn>, nor of the 
fathers being baptiztd unto him, either in the cloud or in 
the fea ; but as Paul had brought forward this manner of 
expreffion, and as he only had thus done, I confidered it but 
reafonable to allow Paul to explain him.felf. But as Mr* 
A. contrary from all reafonable men, will not fuffer a man, 
even the apoftle, to explain himfelf, and treats me not very 
civilly for my referring the matter to Paul, we will there- 
fore hear Mr. A. 

2. Says he, " Prepofitions are every thing with you. 
But how are we to underftand them ? Beyond all doubt, 
the declaration of the apoftle is founded upon the faifl in 
the Mofaic narrative. This you have not dared to look ia 
the face.'* 



Mr. Aiijllris Mijiakes, 39 

Anfwer. Is it with me, or with the apoftle, he is con- 
tending ? I have made no prepofitions. I added none to 
thofe uled by the apoftle. I juft fet to view the text, as 
Paul delivered it. " Beyond all doubt, (fays Mr. A.) thefe 
prepofitions are to be underftood by the fadl in the Mofaic 
narrative." Suppofe this to be true, yet is not PauPs ex- 
pofition of Mofes's narrative as good as Mr. A.'s ? But, 
fays he, " This (the Mofaic narrative) you have not dared 
to look in the face.'* This is Mr. A.'s ftieer miftake ; for 
I truft, through grace given unto me, there is not a fmgle 
text in all the good word of God, but I dare look it in the 
f.ice, and am willing to underftand its full import, with 
a defire to obey it. 

I fliall now endeavour to look his two formidable texts 
full in the face. The firft is in Exod. xiv. 19. And the 
pillar of the cloud went from before their face and flood 
behind them ; and it came between the camp of the Egyp- 
tians and the camp of Ifrael." This explains one part of 
uhat Paul fays, namely, That all our fathers were under the 
£lou(L The pillar of cloud went from before their face and 
flood behind them. Then it palled over all of t^em, as it 
pafled from front to rear. This may figuratively reprefent a 
tombflone, which lies over the luhole grave. Very well ; and 
what is the other text which I dare not look in the face ? 
It is this, verfe 22, And the children of Ifrael went into the 
mid ft of the fea upon dry ground, and the waters were a 
'wall unto thetn on the right hand and on the left. This 
gave Paul an occafion to fay. And all paffed through the 
fea. H^re is the Mofaic narrative. He found that the 
fea, or the waters of the fea, were a wall on each fide of all 
ihe Jfraelites. Put thefe walls and the figurative tomb-ftone 
together, they would be fomething of a figurative tomb ; 
there would be fome refemblance. Hence Paul might, in 
a figurative way of fpeaking, without offending any, except 
the oppofers of gofpel baptifm, fay. And were all baptized 
unto Mofes in the cloud and in the fea. The cloud and 
fea, taken together, encompafled them, or overwhelmed 
them, as they were foUovi'ing Mofes their leader ; and in 
the mean time they experienced a very memorable deliver- 
ance, which, as a figure, points out the deliverance from 
fui, or the falvation by Jefus Chrift, even as water baptifm 
does. Now we appeal to the Bible, to the ftubborn fafts 
related, to common fenfe, to any thing and to every thing 
which will fpeak the truth, if Mr. A. had not better have 
done nothing in defence of his errors, than to bring fuch 



^o Second Expofition of 

texts as thefe to the confideration of the public. For does 
not this very matter look a little like immerfion, the goipeJ 
baptifm ? And where is there the lead refemblance of his 
popifli notion of pouring or fprinkling ? It would be ridic- 
ulous to fay, that all the Ifraelites were fprlnkled, or had 
water poured upon theni, either from a pillar of fire or 
from the fixed walls of war'^r on each fide. This is Mr. 
A.'s artillery, by which he ha:, if wt may believe his own 
words, confounded all my affertions, and taken away my 
defenftve armour ; or, this is fufficient to do it. 

3. But, fays he, " You Jhulk under prepofitions, in the 
hope they will fljield you from the eyes of thofe who are 
able to dete(5l your fophifms." The public will judge 
whether I have 7^«/i^^ under prepofitions, or under any 
thing elfe, or whether 1 have any occafion to for the prefent. 
But from what does Mr. A. fuppofe I am Jkulh'mg ? He 
plainly tells me, " From the eyes of thofe who are able to 
deleft my fophifm?.'' I appeal to every impartial reader 
of his Letters, whether he has, in either of his pamphlets 
deteded any of my fophifms, or fiiown me to be guilty of 
one. He has told me in the public hearing, page 43, 
*' That he pitted me^'^ and in page 20, " that he ivould be merci- 
ful and not expofe^ too mucky the nahednejs of the landf* &c- 

But where has he proved me guilty of a fophifm, or any 
confiderable nilftake, or one mifreprefentation, or one tri' 
jl'ingy unmanly argument ? 

4. But, fays he, " Tou mujl come out. Ton have commit^ 
ted your f elf before the public. Tou have impofed on the credulity 
of your unlearned readers^, by indefenjible aJfertiotiSj which you do 
not fupporty and mifl he rebuked for your temerity. ^^ 

Anf<wer. I confefs I feel myfelf happy, that I live in a 
land of freedom, where I am not afraid to come out, and 
defire Mr. A. to make good his charge. Let him fliow, if he 
be able, in what 1 have committed myfelf before the public. 
Let him fiiow, if he can, for I invite him to expofe me, and 
I aik oi him neither///)' nor mercy, fo as to keep back one 
truth, by which he can expofe my impofition upon the cre- 
dulity of my unlearned readers, by fo much as one indefen- 
fible afTertion. If I have not done this in a fingle inftance, 
but do fupport my afiertlons, and Mr. A. be not able to 
gainfay them, but by f^ch weak and beggarly arguments 
y^splBures in his Bible, calling to the fpirits of dead men, or 
telling ftories about a Baptift minifter^s praying too loud. 
Then I afk for what temerity I am to be rebuked by him. 
Mr. A. ought to remember, that we do not live where 



Mr. Auftin's Mljlahs, 41 

the mouths of the baptized church are flopped by prifons, 
fires, racks and gibbets. Truth begins to break forth with 
brightnefs. The God of the baptized church will defend 
her, and his plagues begin to be poured upon Antichrift ; 
and fuch of God's people as do not hear his voice, and 
come out of her fpeedily, may receive not a little of thefe 
plagues. 

5. For a general anfwer to Mr. A.'s reply to my 
expofmg his erroneous notions of diaphorois baptifmais 
Heb. ix. 10. the public are referred to my Letters to him, 
p. 43, 44, and 45. But as he confiders himfelf to have 
gained fome advantage from the ufe of the word diapho- 
rois in a different connexion, fome fm.all attention muft 
be paid to it. His words are, " The Greek word is ufed 
but in one other place in the New-Teftament ; that is in 
Rom. xii. 6. Having therefore gifts differing, diaphora, 
according to the grace given to us, whether prophecy or 
miniftry, &c. Thefe gifts, fays he, are different in kind.'' 

The following obfervations will fhow, that the text, Rom. 
xii. 6. and the word diaphora as there ufed, will afford him 
no help. . 

1. For, to fay the Icaft, it is a very doubtful thing, 
whether the gifts, differing according to tlie grace given, be 
different hinds of gifts, or different /pedes of the fame kind oi 
fpiritual gifts. Indeed to me it is no doubtful cafe at all. 
For there are different kinds of gifts of the Spirit. Such 
2lS gifts efftntially connecfled with the- /inner'' s fahationi) mirac- 
ulous gifts ^ -^.Tid edifying gifts, Thofe gifts of which Paul is 
fpeaking, Rom. xii. 6, 7. are of the latter kind, and differ- 
ent fpecies of that kind. This text is therefore nothing to 
his purpofe. 

2. But grant it, if 'he choofe, that the gifts fpoken of 
are different in kind ; yet it will not follow, as he fuppofes, 
that the fame adjective, in Heb. ix. 10. mufl mean different 
kinds of baptifms. It might in one cafe mean different 
fpecies of the fiime kind, and in another different kinds, 
So it would prove nothing to his purpofe, even fuppofe it 
meant juft as he fays. . 

3. But, fuppofe farther, that the ufe of the word dia- 
phorat Rom. xii. 6. would prove, that in Heb. ix. lo. the 
apoftle is fpeaking of different kinds of baptifms, then it 
would confound Mr. A.'s whole argument from the texti 
as to gofpel baptifm, or worfe ; for then he muft fay one 
of thefe two things ; either, nrft^ that it hath nothing ti> 



42 - Second E>:pofition of 

do with goipel baptifm \ or fecondly, that there are differ 
ent kir.d^. of goi'pel baptifins. If he fay the fiift, that if. 
hath ncthirg to do vith gofpelbaptifm, then itvould cor- 
found his argument, for then he would all this while have 
been arguing from a topic which hath nothing to do with 
the fubjedl. If he fay the other, that there are different 
kinds cf gofpel baptifms, then he dees wcrfe than give up 
his whole argument ; for he implicitly charges the apof- 
tJe with falffchood, and our Lord Jefus Chriil with impofi- 
ticn and negligence. He implicitly charges the apoftle 
with falfehood ; for Paul exhorts the Ephefian Chriftians 
to unity, and ufes as one argument to this, that there is 
but one Lord, one faith, one tapifm. Now if there be differ- 
ent hinds of gofpel baptifms, Pail muft have fpoken falfe- 
ly, with a defign, no doubt, to deceive. But this is 
not the wcrft which Mr. A, dees. Le implicitly charges 
our Lcid Jefus Chiift with impofiti(n and nfgl'gence ; 
for our Lord knew^ how to fpeak in fuch plain language, 
that his poor, ignorant and devout fcllov ers might under- 
f^and him. But in (lead cf doing fo, (if Mr. A. be corre(5l) 
he Ipeaks in iuch ambigw us and unccrt in language, that 
for ieverai of the fiift centuries, no one underilcod himi, 
and none were certain that they underftood him to mean, 
or that he did mean, by grfpel baptifm any thing {\:o\X. of 
immerfjon, till P(pe Cltnunt the Fifth, in the fourteenth 
century, arofe and informed the world, ih At fpr inkling fhould 
be 'valid <\wd goipcl baptifm : And indeed had it not been 
for Mr. Auilinof Worcefter, the Chrifrian world wVuld not 
have known, to this day, that there were different kinds of 
gofpel baptifms. Thus according to Mr. A. our bleffed 
Lord and Saviour (Ihcckirg to fayj has impoftd upon his 
ignorant followers. Not only lo, but the ccmpa{lG(.nate 
and all-wife Saviour hath given the law^ cf gcfpel baptifm 
in iuch equivocal and uncertain terms, that f(j io( V- as his 
followers come to know any thing about letters, they muft 
be ct mending about what it is, lor it could not but be 
expecf^ed that iome of the more ignorant ones vould con- 
tend for the old way which was pra<51ifed, with few ercer- 
tions, f( 1 fifteen hundred years. Yes, and not only fc, but 
Matthew, and Mark, and Luke, and Jthn, and Paul, and 
Peter, have agreed ic^' ether in keeping us igncrrni. For 
wherever and whenever they have Ipoken of gofpel br.p- 
tifm, they have uniformly If e ken c^ it, when they have^ 
mentioned any explanatory cirtumiflance about it, as though 
it were one thing? and a? tht iigh that ovx" thirg were in> 



I Mr. Aiijlins Mi/iakes. 43 

merfion. Mat. iii. 6. tells us, that the penitents were bap- 
tized in Jordan, Mark tells us, i. 5. that they were baptiz- 
ed in the river of Jordan. Luke informs us, that when the 
ordinance of baptifm was adminiRered, they not only came 
to the laater, but went into it. Adts viii. John gives us to 
underiland, that b iptifm was aJminillered in a certain 
place, becaiife there was much water there. John iii. 23. 
Paul tells us, that as many as were baptized into Jefus 
Chrift, were buried and raifed with Chriil in the ordinance. 
Rom. vi. 3, 4. Col. ii. 12. Peter tells us that baptifm is .1 
figure of our falvation, anfwering to the figure, the ark, in 
which Noah was faved. Chap. iii. 21. of his iirit epiille. 
Now all thele have agreed together to deceive us, if it be 
a deception, and to make us, poor, ignorant creatures, who 
have not come to maturity of judgment^ corrednsfs of knotui' 
\ edge, and Jiability of fdith^ believe, that gofpel baptifm i.s 
I but one thing, and that one thing is im merfion, in the aanid 
\ of the Father, &c. Whereas they have not faid fo much 
j as one word Tibout Jprini/ing or pouring being the matter of 
' gofpel baptifm, or given io much as one circumftanca 
which makes it look as though fprlnkling or pouring wjio 
ever either commanded or practded. Indeed had not rop.- 
Clement, in the year 1305, have told us that fprinkang w.u 
valid, fcriptural, gofpel baptifm, no Chriflian for the hril 
eighteen hundred years of Chriftianity, would have known 
that it was fo ; and all might have proceeded on in their 
ignojince, and have believed, that as there were but one 
Lord, one faith, fo there was but one valid, fcriptural, gofpel 
baptifm. In much the fame ft ate of ignorance might the 
Chriftian world have now been, with refpect to another 
' important matter, had not Mr. A. been raifed up to inllruft ■ 
llwis, that there are different kinds of gofpel baptifms. Does 
ilfTj^Qt this buiinefs of Mr. A. do worfe than confound his 
argument ? Does it not make his Popifh baplifms look 
worfe than it would for him to give up his argument from 
Heb. ix. 10? In Ihort, had he not better have taken my 
i^ advice, if he would maintain his fide, to fay nothing about 

6. We will now attend to Mr. A.'s laR and moft formi- 
dable argument againft immerfion, as being the only gof- 
pel baptifm. As this lafi and main argument is but the old 
Antichriflian argument, with a new drefs, it might receive 
but little notice, were it not that by repeatedly turning it 
over before the public, they may, one after another, fee the 
mark of the bead upon it. Another conaderation may 



44 Second Expofttion of 

render It advlfable to pay fome attention to It ; and it Is 
this : This their Jirjl and lajl argument is the only argu- 
ment for which they have even a plaufible pretence. It 
was the principal argument which Cyprian in the third 
century ufed for fprinkling, or aifufion ; and it is the laft 
which Mr. A, ufes in the nineteenth. Cyprian doubted its 
vahdity j but Mr. A. is fomewhat confident that it will 
anfwer. 

We will nov/ hear his argument. 

Says he, page 40, 41, 42, "To conclude this part of the 
controverfy on the mode of baptifm, omitting the much 
that might be faid in favour of fprinkling and affufion, as 
both warranted in the fcriptures, I will content myfelf with 
one remark ; and that is upon the impradlc ability of the 
ordinance according to your account of it. In befiegcd 
cities, where there are thoufinds and hundreds of thou* 
fands of people ; in fandy deferts, like fome parts df Af- 
rica, Arabia and Paleftine, and in fome northern regions, 
"where the ftreams and the ppnds, if there be any, are fhut 
up by impenetrable ices; and in fevere and extenfive 
droughts, like that which took place in the time of Ahab ; 
fufficiency of water for animal fubfiftence is alraoft unpro- 
curable. In fome cafes it is entirely fo ; infomuch that 
millions of human beings have fuffered great diftrefs by 
thirft. Now fuppofe God fhould, according to the pre- 
didions of the prophets, pour out plentiful effufiops of his 
Spirit, fo that ail the inhabitants of one of thefe regio.'is or 
cities fhall be born in a day ; upon your hypolhefis there 
is an abfolute impoffibility they fhould be born into the 
kingdom, while there Is this fcarclty of water ; and this 
may laft for months ; yea, as long as/they live. And thefe 
thoufands and hundreds of thoufmds of Chriftians, mud 
remain all this while, and perhaps die, without having 
once the confolation of fupping with their Redeemer. 
Now it muil require very clear evidence to convince me, 
that the elfence of baptifm lies in that which. In fo many 
cafes of this kind, muft defeat the very defign of it ; and 
that baptifm is ever an indifpenfable prerequiiite to the 
Lord's Supper. This moreover is altogether unb'ke what 
we find on the face of apoftolic pradlice." _ 

Thus fays Mr. A. in the light of the nineteenth century ; 
and what does it all come to ? The following remark may 
Ihow. 

I. The whole of It is argumentum ad pajjlones, that is, 
an argun^ent addreiTed to the paffions and prejudices of men. 



\ 



Mr. Aitfthis M'lfiakes. 45 

i. We mufl: make Chrill's pofitive inftitutions lx)w to 
•our convenience jufl: when it fuits us, becaufe in fome pof- 
fible caies, which have never yet happened, and never will, 
v/e could not be baptized according to the command and 
pattern given, with refpect to that ordinance. 

3. God may, not according to the predi(5Llons o£ the 
prophets, give a great rain from the upper fprings, and (hut 
up the lowir ones, fo that a nation or city may be born in 
a day, -and there be, at the time, not water fuQicient to 
baptize them, therefore baptifm cannot always mean bap- 
tifm, that is, immerfion ; but mud fometimes mean rau- 
tifm, that is, fpr'inkl'ing. 

4. If thoufands and hundreds of thoufands (hould be 
born, on tliat very day in which they had fpent the laft 
of the water, which the city, or fiindy defert contained, 
what would Mr. A. do then I Would he not do as fome 
of the popilh monks are faii to have done, baptize them 
with fand l 

5. But there is another difficulty. Suppofe their vines 
oiould not yield their fruit, what would he do then, as to 
the feoDnd gofpel ordinance ? No doubt he would fubflitute 
water, or fome other liquid, if he had any j for if he may, 
to fuit the times, change the very ellence of one ordinance, 
'le may, no doubt, change the element of another. Bat 
iappofe he had no fubftitute, fo that it would be utterly 
impofiible to fup with his Redeemer ; then Mr. A. would, 
If confiftent with himfelf, conclude, that Chriil never in- 
tended to command the real ufe of bread and wine, or any 
v-^ther material elements in the ordinance of the fupper ;' 
for the want of bread and wine may happen as ofcen and 
to as great multitudes, as the want of water. Then he 
might conclude thus : 

*' Now it mud require very char evldencs to convince me, 
that the ejfence of the Lord*s fupper lies in that nvhlch, in Jo 
many cafes oi this kind, mufl defeat the very defign ofit.'* 
Thus Mr. A. with the very fame argument, by which He 
condemns my principles, juftifies the Quakers. Juft fo far 
as his argument 1: good in one cafe, it is the fame in the 
other. His argument is either good for nothing, becaufe 
it proves too much, or elfe it proves juft enough, and the 
Quakers are in the right. 

6. The "To many cafes of this hindr which he fuppofes 
mufl: defeat the very defign of baptifm, are mere imagina- 
tion ; not one of them has ever occurred, or ;s ever lite 
to. 

E 2. 



4^ Second Expofiiion of 

7. But his concluding words r^re particularly noticeable f 
they are thefe : *' This moreover is altogether unlike what 
we find on the f;ice of apoflolic praftice/' 

If he mean, that what he hath -been faying, and that his 
whole argument is altogether unlike what we find on the 
face of apoftolic praftice, it is a folemn truth. For we 
do, indeed, find not a word of his popifli and wicked ar- 
gument and practice in any of the writings of thofe holy 
men. We appeal to the Bible, to ftubborn fafls, and to 
the common fenfe of all mankind, if there be, in any one 
text of the whole Bible, w^here it fpeaks of gofpel times and 
gofpel ordinances, fo much as a fingle fliade of likenefs * 
between the apoftolic practice and Mr. /^.'s argument, and 
the errors which he would fupport by it ? -But if he intend 
by his clofing affertion, that liis argument and tenets are 
altogether like what we find on the face of apoftolic prac- 
tice, then his alTertion is very illy founded, and deferves a 
worfe name than I choofe to give it. But this 1 will fay, 
it may, at lea ft, be numbered among his other great mif- 
takes, and the argument itfelf may increafe the number of 
his weak ones. 

A man of fenfe miuft indeed have a miferable fide, to be 
compelled to ufe fuch miferable arguments in the defence 
of it. 1 can bear with tolerable patience to hear Mrv A. 
accufe me of repetitions, for I had rather be guilty of a 
thoufand, than to have one fuch argument as tliis juftly 
laid to my account. 

7. Were it not for the importance of the prefent con 
troverfy, I might be apprehenfive fome of m.y readers 
would gladly difmifs the remaining errors, of Mr. A. ; but 
when it is confidered that his errors, generally fpeaking, 
belong to a great clafs of men, and that fome, who are 
with him in them, are not only men of fenfe and eruditi( ji, 
but of piety too ; and befides, when it is confidered, th<>t 
where his errors are expofed, many n.ay have them,"^ and 
more may take heed not to imbibe them ; then it will ap- 
pear that too much cannot be done to bring them into their 
defired difreped. I iliall therefore fet another clufter of 
them to public viev/. In the firft place we fhall fet tliem 
down, as Mr. A. has given them to us in his 43d page, and 
then expofe them individually. They are'contained in his 
words which follow, *< There is but little hazard, that 
yeur moft partial readers w^ill be quieted by the' new in- 
vention of yours, as much at variance with coriitnon fenfe, 
and with the explanations of your BaptiU brethren, as with 



Mr. Aufiin'i Mijlakes. 47 

the fcHptures, that the covenant of clrcumcifion is bat a 
token of the covenant of grace. That it is but a mere 
law, anvl that clrcumcifioa itfelf is this covenant. This is 
twifting and turning inJeed. * The covenant of circumci^ 
fion equal, (fay you) every man child being circumcifed ; 
every man-child being circuixicifed equalj the clrcumcifing 
of the flefh of their forefkin ; the circunicifuig of the flefh 
of their forefl;in equal, the token of the covenant between 
God and Abraham ; here the token of the cover,arat be- 
twixt God and Abraham equal, the covenant of circumci- 
fion : for it is a v\rell known axiom, that things that are 
equal to the ilime are equal to one another.' This alge- 
braic equation, my friend, m pity to you^ I will leave undQ? 
a fmiple quotation," 
Soma of his errors cont lined in this quotation are, 
I. His calling it an invention of mine, to cinfider the 
covenant of circamcilion as but a token of tlie covenant of 
e^race. 'Ihis is farfroni being an invention of mine. For 
fiith the Lord, Gen. xvii. 9, 10, 11. "Thou llialt keep my 
covenant theref ne, thou aad thy ^qqI after thee, in their 
generations. Tnis is my covenait which ye (hill keep be- 
tween me aii you and thy feej.a^ter thee ; evjry man-child 
amo.ig you ill ill be cyrcunicifed \ and ye fhali c\r:im:'ife tli^ 
fltp of yodv forjhlni and it fh lU be a token of the cjvmant 
htvj'ixt mf and ^o.v." In the 13th verfe, God, fpeaking 
manifeftly of this fams covenant of circumcifioU; faith, 
My oijinant fh dl be in yiur fi.jhi for an everlafting cove- 
nant." Alfo in verfe 14.. fpeaking of the fame covenant, 
the Lord faith, ** And the uncircumcifed man-child whoje 
JljiJj of his forefkin is not circumcifed, that foul (bail be; 
cut off from his people, he hath broken my coiienanf^ Does 
Mr. A. fuppofe, that the uncircamciied man-child had 
broken the covenant of grace ? If he do, the fcriptures fay 
no fuch thing. He had broken the covenant of circumci- 
fion, or the law, or covenant of circumcifion had not been 
obferved with relation to him,- Thus v>^e fee nxj invention 
is the good old Bible account of the matter. However, it 
is not to be wondered at, that he (hould wifh to get rid of 
this matter by calling it a new invention of mine. For this 
good old Bible account destroys his anti-chriftian notion of 
putting children into the covenant of grace by baptizing 
them. For all the plea which he has for this fuperftitious 
bufmefs, is, that Abraham and his feed put their children, 
as he and his brethren erroneoufly fuppofe, into that cove- 
nant, by circumcifmg them. Bur this Bible account of 



43 S<:co:id Ec^pofdion of 

circamcui>a removes this part of tlie inyjisrj of iniquity ; 
and iliows tlv.it Abraham's children v/ere not put inLO the 
covenant of grace by being circumcifed, and fo It deilroys 
tJie notion of judaizing Ciiriitians putting theirs in bj bap- 
•tifm. 

2. Another error In the above qaotation' is, his repre- 
fenting what he calls var ne-.v invention, as being at va- 
riance with common fenfe, and with the explanations ofrn/ 
Baptift brethren, and with the Bible. ' 

As to the explanations of my baptized brethren, I know 
fiot what the}- are, not recollecting, or having never ^^yx 
any of them. Yet,, finding that my invention appears 'to- 
iiarmonize perfe*5tly with the Bible reprefentation, and 
knowing that the Bible and common kw^Q agree, and alf> 
knowing that my baptized brethren generally agree with 
both, I conclude, that I am not greatly at variance with 
either of the three. 

3. His next error in this cinder is his declaration, that 
my confidering the covenant of circumcidon to be but a 
token of the covenant of grace, and that circunicifion itfjlf 
is this covenant, is tzu'yiing and turning indeed, 

I appeal to the Bible and common ^Qw^Qi if I have not 
gone fide by fide with both of them. If I have, therp is. 
neither I'vj'ijitng nor turning about it, fave it twills his erro- 
neous fentiraents, and turns his nothn of putting his gracehFs 
children into the covenant of grace, by for inkling thorny 
out of credit, and mikes it appear as it fnoald, an inven- 
tion of man. This is what I call, going right forward, 

4. The other error, which I Ihall here mention, is hi? 
unreafonable pity towards me. It was fo great, that he 
]ias left us all in ignorance of what the covenant of cir- 
cumcifion is. The public wouM have been- under great 
obligation to him, had he pitied me leis, and Xo h i-i given 
them a plain view, or clea.r acco^ant of the covenant of cir- 
cumcifion. But as the matter is, the public muft ftill be 
uninformed, or elfe take my new invendon, the good old 
Bible reprefentation of this matter. 

8. Another noticeable error of Mr. A.'s is his Imphcit 
denial, that the Pasdobaptift theory is clogged with the 
abfurd principle, and practice too, fo far as their principle 
and practice agree, that if a South-Carolina planter be 
converted, his houfehold are difciples of courfei and are 
to be baptized, though his flaves be 5000.^ This is jufl their 
abfurd principle and practice too, fo far as they are con- 
fiftent with themfeives :' and Mr. A. has Implicitly derfied 



Mr, AuftirCs Mi/lakes, 4g 

it, and as he confefTes it to be a clog to their theory, if true, 
and alfo an abfurdity, it appears to me expedient, in^this 
place, to prove the facft againft their theory, and thus to 
fix an abfurdity upon their pradice, and clog it as much 
as 1 can. But in the firft place, I will give the public his 
attempt to get off. 

In page 46, his words are thefe : fiys he to me, " In 
page 62, you fay, refpe<5ling Abraham's houfehold, * But 
let it be more or lefs, one thing is certain, they were all to 
be circumcifed on account of Abraham's being a good man, 
full of faith.' That which is certain can eafily be prov- 
ed. Proof is not furnifhed ; and it is believed never can 
be furnifhed. Yet you would make ufe of this affertion to 
clog the Pasdobaptift theory with the abfurdity in pra<5tice, 
that if one of us fhould convert a South-Carolina planter, 
into a difciple, we of courfe make difciples of all his Haves, 
though they were 5000." 

Thus fays Mr. A. ; and now what I wiQi is to prove this 
abfurdity upon his theory, and thus clog it as much as I 
can, and, if poffible, fpoil the ill-gotten credit of this juda- 
izing theory, and ftop its prcgrefs. 

My arguments, by which to accomplifh this, are two. 
I. They take the law of circumciiion as their example 
and juftification. Their principle is founded, or built upon 
the law of circumcifion. This law is recorded Gen. xvii. 
12. Thus, <' He that is eight days old Ihail be circumcifed 
among you, every man-child in your generations ; he that 
is born in the houfe, or bought with money of any Jiranger^ 
■ which is not of thy feed." This is the law, and if the read- 
er wifn for any explanatipn, it is furniihed to his hand in 
verfe 23, where Abraham's obedience to it is thus ex- 
prefled. " And Abraham took Ifhmael his fon, and all 
that were born in his houfe, and all thai iu3re bought ivith 
money, every male among the m^n of Abraham^ s houfe^ and cir- 
cumcifed the flefh of their foreikin, in the felf-fame day, as 
God had faid unto him." Here is the law, obedience and 
example, which Paedobaptifts profefs to foUpAYj and on this 
account, and in this particular, they are jalily ftyled, Juda- 
izing Chrlftians. But my prelent bufmefg is to (how, 
that their fentirnent, or principle, leads them to baptize 50 
or 500, or 5000 flaves, belonging to a South-Carolina 
planter, provided he be chriftianized. My argument is 
this. Abraham had many fervants born in his houfe, and 
bought lu'ith his mon^y, years before the covenant of circum- 
ciUon was given. He had 3 1 8 trained foldiers or fervants 



yo Second Expofiilon of 

born In his hoafe, and how many bought with his money 
we know not. He might have many more, before th:? day 
of their circumciiion. For afterwards he was called a 
m!gl^ prince. Gen. xxlii. 6. Now all thefe, which x\braham 
poifefled on the day of clrcumclfion, let them be 50, or 
500, or 5000, were all circumcifed, o^n account of Abra- 
ham's being a good man, full of iaith, or on account of 
the covenant of clrcumclfion, which was made with him. 
The principle of the Psedobaptiils Is founded on this very 
bufmefs, and Is meant to fquare with the covenant of cir- 
cumcifion ; and their pradice with the pradiice of Abra- 
ham. Befides, their principle is, that every believing pa- 
rent or mailer of his family, Is to his family as Abraham 
was to his. Hence my charge againft them is, that to be 
confiilent with their principle, and to go through with 
their theory, they mull baptize a converted South-Carolina 
planter and all his houfehold, whether he have 5, 50, 500, or 
5000 flaves belonging to it. Upon thefameprinciple, I might 
add, to he conjijlent lu'itb themfelvesy they would be, in this 
particular, downright papiils, and baptize the fubjecfls of a 
mighty prince^ becaufe he was converted. If this principle 
be a gofpel one, it will bear examination, and not be the 
worfe for being pra(5lifed to perfection. If It be abfurd 
when pra(ftifed thoroughly, it is not the lefs fo when prac- 
tifed fmally. The only difference is, the abfurdity does 
not appear fo glaring. 

2. My other argument is. That all the evidence for in- 
fant baptifm, to which the Paedobaptifts can make any plau- 
fible pretenfion, is fuanded upon the above abfurd principle. 
They can make no plea, that the families of the jailer, 
Stephanus and Lydia ware baptized upon the faith of the 
parent or mailer, bat upon the principle, that they W3re 
thus baptized, becaufe Abraham's family were circumcifed 
upon his faith. Now I argue thus, If it be according to 
the gofpel to baptize a fmail family, or houfehold, on tlie 
faith of a believing parent or mailer, it is according to the 
fame gofpel to b:ip:ize a larger one ; and, if the principle 
be good, the larger the better, if there be any advantage 
in it, for then the more will be profited. Becaufe I thus 
argue, Mr. A. charges me with wi(h ng to clog the Pjedo- 
baptifl theory with this abfurdity in praflice. I confefs, I 
am not for halving matters, but for having good principles 
thoroughly praflifed, and the abfurdity of bad ones fully to 
appear. 



Mr, Aujlin's Mifiakes. 51 

I ccr.fider iryfelf as having turned ling's e'v'iclcr.ce. I fee 
xry former errors, ard rencurce them ; I ccricemn them, 
as having been pradifed by m^yfelf, ar.d cannot juftify them 
as pradifed by others. 

If my arguments be jiifl, Mr. A. confcfTes their pra<^ice 
is abfurd ; or that it is abfurd to pradife upon fuch a the- 
ory. \{ the practice be abfurd, the theory is fo too. If 
my argum.ents be not juft, if they ^e not founded upon the 
very principle of their pradice, they are invited to expofe 
them, and to do it thoroughly. But if my arguments be 
corrcdt, then they are invited to leave their abfurd pra(rtice, 
and come up to the help of the Lord, to the help of the 
I crd againft the m.ighty. 

Upon the fame page, -whence he took the laft quotation, 
Mr. A. tells me that he highly edeems the gofpel ordi- 
nance of baptifm ; it is hoped that his future writings will 
bear a better ttftinrony in his favour. Cn the fame page, 
he alfo infcim.s me, he has-expofed himfelf to great perfon- 
al trials, to guard the facredrefs of that ordinance. Would 
it nof be well for him to expofe himfelf to a few' more, that 
he iri^ht keep the ordinance according to the command- 
ment and pattern given ? 

In page 4.8, he (through an error of judgmient^ charges 
rr e with condemning myfelf. Kis wxrds are. " You have 
attempted to fix opprobrium upon the doiflrine of PsEdo- 
biiptilm, by deriving it from the foul fink of pcpcry, and 
iipcn its abetters, as enlifted under the banners of Antichrifi. 
But ycu have condemned yourfelf with refped to the firft, 
by conceding, that* fprinkling was pradifed in the cafe of 
clinicks bek re prpery exifted, and that infant baptifm was 
in general prrdifed in the days of St. Auftin.'* 

Kere the good man's error is in his judgm^ent. I have 
never conceded that fprinkling, for gofpel baptifm, was 
pradifed in the cafe of clinicks, or in any other cafe, before 
prpery cxifted. Tlie wxfury of this iniquity began to w^ork 
even in the apcftles* days, and prpery hiid gotten crn- 
ficerr-bje footing, when they fubftituted fprinkling in the 
cafe of fick pericns, for gofpel baptifm. When St. Auftin 
flor.iiihed, popery was in its full tide of fuccefsful exper- 
iment. , It had now fpread over nighly all what was call- 
ed the Cljiifiian world, fave thiC Hcietcs, as the Pssdobap- 
tifts called them, in the vallies of Pieciniont. Ihefe God 
prefervcd frcm the maik of the Beafi: ; and they never 
luhm.itted to the powers ofAntichiift. Thefe were the 
progenitors of the piefent Bj ptids \ and by the RomaniiU^ 



52 Second Expofttion of 

they were ftyled the oldeft herefy in the world. Hence, 
Mr. A. mftead of Ihowing a contradidion of mine, has 
through error of judgment, added ons to the number of his 
miftakes. However foul the fmk of pcpery is, from that 
came P^dobaptifm, and it is one of the main pillars of the 
man of fm. Beildes, all who plead for it, plead for the 
principal ordinance and pradice of Antichrift. Chrift 
liath no where commanded Paedobaptifm ; nor has he in 
any place commiOioned his minifters, either to preach or 
pradife it. But the Pope hath done both. 

In his 49th page, he appears to have fome clofmg ftrokes. 
" On the whole, fays he, the controverfy between you and 
me is brought to an ilTue. It is this, The foundation of your 
fhado<wy fabric ivas laid in ajfertion : The fuperjlrudiire was 
reared in ajfertion : It has been attempted to he holden up by af 
fertion ; and it has at lajl vani/hed as a mere Jhadcnvy thing.'^ 
Even this aflerticn requires a little proof. By it Mr. A. 
expe«5>cd to give the fmifhing ftroke to the taking away of 
try dcfsnjive armor. I frankly confefs, it hath as much pow- 
erful efiicacy towards removing it, as any paffage, or 
even page which preceded it. I might, however, have 
excepted the two firil lines of his title page ; for there he 
tells us that it is done. Had he not given us the infor- 
mation,inthe firft outfet of his pamphlet, that Mr. Merrill's 
defenfr^ armor was taken from him, no perfon who un- 
derftood the controverfy, would have gathered the idea 
from an}' thing which followed. 

We will now turn our attention for a moment to his laft 
Letter, in which he makes fome obfervations upon my 
clofmg one to him. In this he does not appear in perfe<^ly 
good humour. All his fentences do not appear like apples 
of gold in pictures of filver. He fays that the" court, by 
which his errors were tried, is not in the Bible. This is 
alfo his miftake ; for all the texts in the Bible which fpeak 
of a particular fubje6t, is the Bible with refpeil to that fub- 
je(ft. He alfo tells me that I entirely lofl fight of the ob- 
je<5l which I ihould have had in view, the fupport of my 
own theory and pracftice. This is alfo his miftake ; for I 
kept in fight the fupport of my own theory and practice, 
and the deftrudlion of his. He farther fays, That the court, 
v.^hich was eredled was not the one to w^hich he appealed. 
This is a third miftake ; for it was the Bible with refped 
to his three great Antichriftian errors ; which are, fprink- 
ling for gofpel baptifm, manifeft unbelievers the iubje6l$ 



Mr. AuJtirCs Mijlakes, 53 

of brptiim, and communion with unbaptized perfons. By 
the Bible thefe three were tried and condemned. Plad 
Mr. A. when he wrote his reply, poffeiTed a folemn fenfe 
of this truth, that by die Bible he, as well as I, muft be 
judged at the laft day, he would, probably, have omittedfev- 
eral of his epithets, and have endeavoured to prove, unlefs 
he were convinced of his errors, that though the court was a 
good one, yet he. had not a fair hearing. Had he come 
forward, and have ihown that any of the witneffes were 
bribed, or rather that the fenfe of their teftimony was 
perverted, and requefted a re-hearing, anh obtained it, as he 
might have done, and then have brought forward fome of 
the witnefles again, and have fhown, in open court, that they 
juftified his principle and pradice, and condemned mine, 
then he would juftly have caft the charges upon me ; but 
to be out of humour, as I have feen fome, after trial had, 
is n«t the bed way to prove the innocency of his errors. 
Had he have confidered my ufage towards him, not of the 
beft kind, furely his wifdom was to have proved his fen- 
tence unjuft. Then would he have righteoufly brought on 
/ne the two-fold crime of juftifying the guilty, and con- 
dem^ning the innocent ; yes, had he been able to have pro- 
duced one text, which fhould fpeak for him, he would have 
been juftified, according to a ftatement which I made at 
the time, and before the court, in thefe words, * Every 
text is allowed to be a good witnefs, and to poffefs evidence 
fufficient to fet the accufed free, upon bearing teftimony 
in his favour.' - Had he have found one text to his pur- 
pofe, he could have been acquitted before the public, be- 
fore his owm confcience, and alfo before the Judge of all. 
But fo long as he fhall fubftitute hard words for hard ar- 
gument, he may not be fully acquitted before either, and 
will convince but few that his caufe is good. 

However, I by no means fault him for bringing no' text 
to his help ; for I knew beforehand that he had none to 
bring. Other wife I Ihould not have been fo bold in con- 
demning his errors, and in warning him to forfake them. 
His fault is in retaining them after tliey liave been tried by 
the Bible and found nvant'mg. I well knew, that a degree 
of feverity was ufed with his errors, but ^ truth would 
fully juftify fuch a ufe, it was confidered that the obftinacy 
of the cafe called for it. Error muft be treated as being what 
k is, the enemy of God and man ; and the grofs errors of Mr, 

F 



54 Second Expofition of 

A. may call for feverer treatment ftill j for they belong to 
the man of fm, whom the Lord will condemn with the 
Spirit of his mouth, and will deftroy with the brightnefs of 
his coming. 

Did Mr. A. know the figns of the times, he would not 
have written with fo much contempt as he has done. His 
courage, and that of his brethren too, in their wicked oppo- 
fition againft the Bapiifts will foon fail them. He doubtlefs 
recolle<5ls what a bloody decree was iffued againft the Jews, 
in the days of Haman, the fon of Hamedatha, the Agagite, 
and figned in Ahafuerus's name, and fealed with the king's 
fcal, to deftroy, to kill, and caufe to perifh, all Jews, 
throughout the hundred -twenty and feven provinces, from 
India to Ethiopia. Probably he has alfo recoUeftion of 
the decree which was ifTued at Efther's fuit, by which the 
Jews had full liberty to ftand for their lives, and to deftroy, 
to flay and caufe their enemies to perifli. This hath been 
written in the book of Efther, for our learning. The Pope 
and his conclave, prompted by their rooted hatred towards 
the baptized church, have iifued their decree againft them - 
to deftroy, to kill and caufe them to perifh. But a very 
different decree is now gone forth, of which Mr. A. hath 
either not heard, or yet difbelieves. Indeed, it may be 
that the Baptifts themfelves have not, generally, had the 
information, or dare not fully credit it, that they now have, 
according to the decree of the King, a perfe<5b liberty to 
fland for their lives, and to deftroy, to flay and caufe to 
perilh, by the fword of the Spirit, which is the word of 
God, not Mr. A.'s errors only, but alf© all the laws, tra- 
ditions, ftatutes and ordinances of antichrift. Ihe report 
of this decree may be to Mr, A. like as the fecond decree 
of Ahafuerus was to the enemies of the Jews, whilft they 
diftjelieved it ; but in will have a very different effed upon 
both him and his brethren, when the certainty fhall be 
known, which they will foon know, and to their coft too, 
except they fpeedily repent of their hatred to the baptized 
church. It is this decree which emboldens me to ftand for 
my life in the prcfent controverfy ; and fills me with ex- 
pesftatlon, that as it happer>ed to the Jews, that they had 
iule over tliem that hated them, fo it fltall foon be that all 
w^ho walk in all the ftatutes and ordinances cf the Lord 
hlamelcfs, fhall be in honour, and all their adverfarie; con- 
founded. I^et me not feem to Mr. A, or to the i eader, 
)ike Lot to his fons-in-lavv. 



Mr. AuJlirCs Miftakes. 55 

In his concliifion, he informs the reader that his public 
correfponJence with me is clofed. It might have been a^ 
well for him, and more for the credit of his errors, to have 
taken Solomon's advice, and to have left oft contention 
before he had m.eddled with it. But he adds, p. 53, 
" Should any other appear to advocate the doctrine, th^l 
immcrfiou is the exclufive mode of baptifm, and efctial 
to it, he will not be entitled to a pubiic reply, irnlefs he 
fhall make ufe of fome new topic of argument, or give old 
arguments a much more plaufible form than they have 
yet aifamed. And he mud be holden to the Scriptures as 
his fource of evidence, becaufe there can be no elTential 
dodrine, inftitution, or duty, which the Scripture itfelf 
does not clearly afcertain." 

It is not difficult to affign the reafon why Mr, A. re- 
quefts his opponents to employ fome new topic of argument ; 
for their preient topics, plain fcr'ipture precept and example, 
with their dedud:ions, he finds very hard to be managed. 
Yet, to the confufion of his whole fcheme, he fays, •' There 
can be no effential dodrine, inftitution, cr duty, which the 
Scripture itfelf does not clearly afcertain.'* Upon this dec- 
laration of Mr. A.*s the following queftions are propofed' 
to the reader ; 

1. Do the Scriptures clearly afcertain, that fprinklmg is 
the matter of gofpel baptifm ? 

2. Does the Scripture clearly afcertain, that infants and 
houfeholds of unbelieving adults are the fubje<5ls of gofpel 
baptifm ? 

3. Does the Scripture clearly afcertain, that unbaptized 
perfons are to be admitted to the communion ? 

The anfwer to each of thefe is thus, that It doss not. Then 
the conclufion from Mr. A.*s premifes is clearly this. That 
fprinkling for baptifm ; that infants, or unbelieving houfe- 
holds for the fubjeifts of baptifm ; and that communion 
with the unbaptized, are not eifential dc<5trines, inftitutions, 
or duties. Hence, he is amufmg the public, and earneitly 
contending for unefTential matters. This conclufion is juft, 
for it is indeed a truth, that his antifcrlptural notions are 
not eflential, fave to the fupport of worldly inftitutions, and 
to the caufe of the man of fm. 

What we have more to offer, is a few conclufions from 
what we have paffed over. 

1. We conclude, that Mr. A. has a weak and bad 
caufe to defend. For no good man, pOifeflag talents and 



56 Second Expojition of 

education, could ufe fiich falfe and beggarly arguments', 
make fo many miftakes, be guilty of fuch mifrepieienta- 
tions, and fill his pages with notorious errors, in the defence 
of a good caufe, or in the fupport of truth. 

2. We conclude, that Mr. A/s whole performance, 
which we have examined, is one continued heterogeneous 
mixture, of falfe arguments, weak arguments, miftakes, 
niifrepTefentations, and errors ; for we have attended to 
alnioft every page, and have found them to be of this de- 
fcription. 

3. We conclude, that his reafons for quitting the field 
of public correfpondence with the Author, are but too ob- 
vious^ We would fuggeft the idea, whether it would not 
be advifable for him to change his fide, or never enter the 
like field again. 

4. We conclude, that Mr. A. who is no doubt a worthy 
chara<fler and a man of fenfe, has been raifed up by the 
Lord to expofe the weaknefs of his antichriliian caufe ; 
for he is a man of too refined an education to ufe fo much 
ribaldry as too many of bis denomination have done y at 
t he fame time, he is a man of too much honefty, not to 
evpofe his real fentiiT*?nts ; and finding no judicious argu- 
ments to fupport what he really believed true, he has, witl\ 
•4% much pVaufibility as he could, made ufe of the beft argu- 
n.ents which his bad fide afforded. Thefe arguments, in 
their vtry natu;'e, having no tendency to bring convi(5tioa 
IQ unprejudiced minds, will ferve to open to public viev;- 
tno weaknefs and wickednefs of that caufe which fo labours, 
and has, need of fuch management in its defence. Nothing 
is wanting, to the ruin of his caufe and errors, in the judg- 
ment of the candid and impartial portion of the commu- 
nity, but to have them clearly expofed. A few more fuch 
publications as his lafl; will accorapliih this bufniefs. 

5. We conclude, th,at Mr. A. has no confident notion 
of that kingdom, called Chrift's vifibk churchy which the 
God of heaven wa . to fet up in the time of the four great 
monarchies, or during the days of thofe kings fpoken of by 
Paniel the prophet ; for in parts of his pamphlet he ap- 
pears to know not any diiference between ihQ fpiritual king- 
dom of Chrill in this world, which hath continued at leail 
fmce the converfion of Abel, and his 'y//?3/^ Jcingdom, which 
was fet up during the Roman empire, and vj-as at hand 
"when the Eaptiit came preaching in the wildernefH and 
baptizing in Jordan. 



Mr. Auftin^s Mijiakes.. 57 

6. We conclude, that Mr. A/s three great errors, which 
are fprinkliiig or pouring for baptifra,. nianifefl unbelievers 
the fubjects of baptifm, and unbaptized church members 
and communion at tlie Lordrs tabl& with them, are all of 
a piece ; for he has not found, nor can he find, one text of 
fcripture to fupport either of them.. Befides, each of thefe 
errors flrongly tends to deface and diforganize the vifible 
church of Chriil. They muil therefore be parts of the 
man of lln. 

7. We conclude, that whilH Mr. A. has been writing 
his Letters to the Author, he load not for his main object 
the knowledge and defence of the truth ; for if he had^ 
evidence would not have failed him in every particular, 
nor v/ould he have made fuch notorious miftakes an^d blun- 
ders in every page. It is not truth, but error, which com- 
pels men to go fach a crooked courfe as he has travelled^ 
Nor does truth require hard, words to be employed in her 
defence ;. her arguments are fufficiently trying for the erro* 
tieous to endure. Hard words are ufuaJIy the attendants, 
on a bad caufe ; but truth is encompaifed with hard and 
fevere arguirtcnts. To oppofe the tj-urh is like kicking- 
againft fharp pointed pins ; the more refolute the oppofi- 
tion, the more does the oppofer injure himfelf. Would 
Mr. A. look into, the diUurbances of his own bofoair, he- 
would End t.hey are unlike what thofe feel, who are calxnly>, 
y.Qt earneftly vindicating the ways of God to raen. 

8. We conclude, that a real. Chriftian muft be greatly- 
blinded by prejudice; to believe Mr. A.*s errors, when there 
is not one text m the Bible which fpeaks a word in favour 
of either of them, and wheji, at the fame lime,, every textj 
which fpeaks of the fubje<5^ is dire<5lly againft them, and. 
explains and defends the oppofite ; as the reader may fee 
by reading the Author's tweh^th Letter to Mr. A. 

Lajily. We conclude,, that as ths baptized cliurch have 
the open volum.e of revelation on their fide, and the Cap- 
tain of the Lord's hoH: for them, and as the time is now 
come in which they fhould have liberty, full liberty, to, 
ftand for their lives, they Ihould now be ftrong in the Lord 
and in the power of his might, putting on the whole armour 
of God,, tl) at they may be able to ftand againft the wiles, 
of the devil ; for they indeed have to wreftle, not merely 
againft flefh and blood, but againft principalities, againft; 
pov/ers, againft the rulers of the dp.rknefs of this wqrld^. 



38 Second ExpofitioUy l^c* 

againft fplritual wickednefs in high places. At fuch a time 
Heaven may well expe(5l every Chriftian to do his duty ; 
then will the conflict be ihort, and the Lord's battle glori- 
oully won. As Joab faid to his brother, (2 Sam. x. i^.) 
at the critical moment when an hard fought battle was juit 
commencing, (o I fay to my baptized brethren. Be of good 
courage, and let us play the men for our people, and for 
the cities of our God ; and the Lord do that which feemeth 
him good. 

With defires for Chrift's rifing kingdom, 

I am, the reader's and truth*s friend, 

DANIEL MERRILL* 
Sedcwjck, August ix, i£o6. 



• HIV 



BOOKS 

! For f ale by Manning Sff L vring. No, 2, CcrnhilL 



I'^HE Chriftian Banner. A Sermon, preach- 
ed before the Lincoln Baptized AfTociation, and at 
their requell made public. By Daniel Merrill, a. m. 
\_Pnce I2i cti. 

Mr. Merrill's Seven Sermons on the Mode and Sub* 
je(5>s of Baptifm. \_Prlce 37^ cis, 

Mr. Merrill's Tv/elve Letters to Mr. Auftin. 

\_Prke 3 1 -J- ctst 
Mr. Merrill's Letters on Open Communion. 

IP rice 25 cU. 

Letters occafioned by the Rev. Samuel. 

Worcester's Two Difcourfes refpeding the Perpetuity and 
Provifion of God*s gracious Covenant with Abraham and 
his feed. Deteifting, by plain Scripture, ftubborn fads, and 
fober reafon, fonie of his grofs mifreprefentations, unfound- 
ed aflertionsj and fophillical arguments. By Daniel Mer- 
rill. ^Price ^i-^cts. 
Collins's Second Edition of the Quarto BIBLE, with 

Oftervald's Notes, 11 ite?, and Concordance. Collins's 

Bible has obtained celebrity as being the moft corre<5t of 
any ever printed in America. 

An aflbrtment of Carey's Family Bible. 
Fuller's Gofpel its own Wicnefs. IPrice one doL 

Fuller's Life of Pearce. \_Pr\ce one doU 

I'aller's Backflider. \^Price 6i\ cts, 

Burnet's Life of the Earl of Rochefter. \^Price 50 cts. 
Friendly Vifit to the Houfe of Mourning. [Pr/Vf 20 cU. 
Abbadie on the Deity of Jefus Chrift. \_Prtce one dol 

The Second Edition of the Pfalmodift's 

Afllftant : containing an Original Compofition of Pfalm 
and Kymn Tunes; together with a number of Favourite 
Pieces from different Authors. To which is prefixed, an in- 
trodu(5lion to the Grounds of Mufic* By Abijah Forbush. 

S^Prke 62I cts. 

The Baptifm of Believers only, and the Par- 
ticular Communion of the Baptifl: Churches, explained and 
vindicated. In Three Parts. The firft— publiflied origin- 
ally in 1789 j the fecond — in 1794 ; the third — an Appen- 



Booh for fale by Marming iff Loring. 

dix, containing additional Obferrations and Arguments, 
v'ith Strictures on feveral late Publications. By Thomas 
jB A L D w I N . [ Price one dol. 1 2 ^ cts, 

^ The Appendir, containing 180 piiges never before 
pubiifhed, may be bought fcparately, price bound and let* 
tered 6t\ cents, or 50 cents fetched in blue.— The Au- 
thors 'whofe wi icings againll the Baptifts ar-e more partic- 
ularly noticed in this Appendix, are — -Kev. Samuel Wor- 
cefter,. of Salem — Dr. Ofgood, of Medford — K-ev. Samuel 
Auftin, of Worcefter, and Rev. Peter Edwards. 

The Doctrine of the Law and Grace tin- 

foulded Being a Difcourfe fhewing the different natures of 
tlie Law and Gofpel ; and the very diffimilar ftates of thofe 
who are under the Law, and thofe who are under Grace, or 
intereftei in JefusChriil, By John Bun van. 

[^Price one dollar, 

Bunyan's PILGRIM'S PROGRESS, with 

Qriginal Notes, Preface, Life of the Author, and co- 
pious Index to the whole, by Thomas Scott, Chaplain to 
tlie Lock Hofpital, and autlior of Original Notes and Prac- 
tical Obfervations on the Scriptures. (With four copper- 
plates.) '\_Price I ilol. 25 cts. 

The peaceful Refl^clixDns and glorious Prof- 

pe<5ts of the departing Saint. A Diicourfe, delivered in the 
meeting boufe of the Firft Baptifl: Church in Bofton, March 
16, 1807, at the interment of the Rev. Samuel Stillman, 
D. D. late Paftor of faid church. By Thom as Baldwin, d.d, 
Paftor of the Second Baptift Church in Bofton. 

![ Price 10 cfs, 

Stoddard*s Safety of appearing in the Righteoufnei's of 

Chrifl:. [^ Price one doh 

Br. Shepard's Epiftle to Mr. Elias Smith. \_Price 25 cts. 

Huntington's Bank of Faith. [^Price one dol, 

Doddridge's Rife and Progrcfs of Religion in the Soul. 

[^Pricc one doL Jmalier type 87I cts, 

Baxter's Call to tlie Unconverted, {^Prke t2\ cts^ 

Burder^s Oriental Cuftoms. [^Price two dols, 

Thomas A. Kempis's Imitation of Chrift. — This book 

abounds with the moft folemn and weighty thoughts re- 

^efting Chrift, eternal things, and the worth of the foul. 

[Price 75 cts 



LETTERS 

OCCASIONED BY 

Ref, SAMUEL WORCESTER'S 
TWO DISCOURSES 

THE PERPETUITY AND PROVISION OF GOD's GRA- 
CIOUS COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM AND HIS SEE». 

Deteding, 

BIT PLAIN SCRIPTURE, STUBBORN FACTS, AND SOBER REASON, 



\E OF HIS GJ^OfiS MISREPRESENTATlON^i UNFOUNDED A^SER- 
TIONSt AND SOPHISTICAL ARGUMENTS^ 



BY DANIEL MERRILL, A. M. 

PASTOR OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST IN S£DUW1CK> 



P my people ! they which lead thee caufe thee to err, and deftfoy the 
way of thy paths. Jfaiab iil I a, 

I am againft them that prophefy falfc dreams, faith the Lord, and do 
tell them, and eaufe my people to err by their lies, and by their 
lightnefs. Jeremiah xxiii. 32. 

I Even from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from aiine ordi» 
nance», and have not kept them. Malaebi iii. 7. 



BOSTON: 

\ Printed and fold by Manning ^5* Lorinc?, N''" 2, Cornhill. 

1807. 



District of Massachusetts, to wit ; 

BE If REMKMBERED, That on the fourteenth day of March, in the 
thifty-firft year of the independence of the United States of Amer- 
ica, Manning Isf Loring, of the faid diftrid, have depofifed in this 
office the title of a Book, the right whereof they claim as Proprietors, 
in the words following^, to 'wit : — " Letters oceafioned by Revv Samuel 
Worcefter's Two Difcourfes on the Perpetuity and Provifion of God's 
gracious Covenant with Abraham and his Seed. DeteAing, by plain 
Scripture, ftubborn Fads, and fober Rcafon, fome of his grofs iVlifrep- 
rcfentations, unfounded Aflertions, and fophiflical Arguments. By 
Daniex. Merrill, a. m. Paftor of the Church of Chrift in Sedgwick." 

In conformity to the A& of the Congrefs of the United States, enti- 
tled, " An A61 for the encouragement of learning, by fecuring the 
copies of maps, charts, and books, to the Authors and Proprietors of 
fiich copies, during the times therein mentioned :" and alfo to an A<ft,. 
entitled, *• An A&. fupplementary to an AA, entitled, An A<Sl for the 
encouragement of learning, by frcuring^he copies of maps, charts, and 
books, to the Authors and Proprietors of fuch copies, during the timcv 
therein mentioned ; and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of 
defigning, engi-aving, and etching hifloricSl and other prints." 

WILLIAM S. SHAW, Clnh of the Dlfiria t>f Majfachufittu 



TO ALL WHO FEAR GOD. 



MEN AND BRETHREN, 

J^OUR nthniion has been aften dejired^ nnd is 
Jl'tll ivtfitd for. Truth is noiv tvorhng its ^joay through 
darkncfs into light ; it is milking Jure progrefsy like the rays 
^f the mornings yet error ^ nuhere it hath held its empire 
hngy will give place to truth hut through invinciUt mceffitf. 
The inrriter of the following Letters is not altogether ignorant 
of the infiuence of prejudice, and of flrong prepoffeffions. 
He might ^u&ell defpair offuccefsy in his preftnt labours^ were 
it not that truth is Jlronger than all things. 

All fuch as- fear God^ have feafons in which their heart 
is warmed with love to God, to truth, and to duty. In fuch 
precious moments, truth will he permitted to fpeak. When 
it is thus with the godly, I wi/h for their attention to what 
I here prefent them. 

Should you think that the author of the following pages 
has rebuked Mr, IVorceJier more fharply than Paul did 
Peter, then, I pray you, think again — Hath not Mr, Wor^ 
eefler done w&rfe than diffemhling Peter did ? 

I am not offended at Mr. Worcejler^s perfon, but I am 
tffended at the liberties which he hath taken, againfl the 
word and church of the living GoD. If I do not mijlake, 
every candid Chrijiian toill he offended at the fame things^ 
before he fhall have carefully perufed all thofe falfe and delu- 
firy arguments, affertions^ and inftnuations, of Mr, Worcef- 
ter's^ by which be would keep in credit his Judaizing fchemey, 



( iv ) 

and retain the vail on many who begin to fee. My prayer 
to the Father of Lights is, that he will fpeedily rend the 
vail from off the hearts of his own people. Truth, and not 
viBory^ is my ohjeEi, Whether the reader be a friend t$ 
the writer, or the reverfe, is not a matter of fo much folici- 
tude to me, as that the reader be a friend to himfelf ; then 
will he feek for truth, and receive it, though it prove, for 
the prefent, painful, and deflruBive to his errors. 

The fire of love and truth mufl burn up our errors, or we 1 
and they mufl be dejlreyed together. T 

Such us fear God, cannot be difpleafed with the requejl, 
that they will not be fo fivayed by prejudice and cuflom, as to i; 
believe Mr, Worcejler without evidence, and di/believe me, 
when the evidence is fully before them. If I have not fairly 
and fully proved his Sermons to be erroneous and unfounded, 
J afk not to be believed ; but if I have, 1 afk this ftmple 
queflion — JVhy will you not believe me P If the truth be fei 
in full view, can you dijbelieve and yet be innocent P 

Dejlring that truth may prevail, to the fpeedy ruin of my 
own and the reader's errors, 

I am his, with affeElion, 

THE AUTHOR, 

SedgwicKj Octobur 17, i8o6. 



LETTERS, 6?c. 

ADDRESSED TO THE PUBLIC 



IVe appeal to the Bible^ to Jluhhorn fa6ls^ and to 
common fenfe. 



LETTER I. 



frtEN, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 

VJIVE audience, for truth will foon go forth 
as brightnefs, and falvation as a lamp which burneth. 
Many are now running to and fro, and knowledge is in- 
creafing. 

The oppofition of Herod, and the difputings of the Jew- 
ifh do(5tors and priefts, all united to dire(R- the attention of 
men to the child Jefus. In like manner, the oppofition of 
the interefted, and the difputings of the Judaizing do<5lors 
and preachers in our day, will forcibly call the public at- 
tention to what is written of the church of Chrlft. 

God, who turns the hearts of kings at his pleafure, and 
direifts the affciirs of mortals, hath the means at command, 
and can effect every purpofe. 

Great events are taking place daily, and fomething 
greater is expelled. For more than twelve hundred and 
fixty years, there hath been, in what is ftyled the Chriftian 
world, a church, which is formed much aftci the model of 
the Jewiih national church. 

This church hath a Pope anfwerin^>- to the Jcwifh high 
prieft, feventy cardinals for tlie fevei.ty e.Jers in Ifrael ; 
a national antichriftran church, anfvvermg to the national 
Jewiih church. Ii.fant bapufm for Jewiih infant circum- 



6 Letiters en Rev, S. Worce/ier*s 

cifioiu Baptifro adminiftered to thofe who bring forth no 
fruits, as evidence of repentance, and to fuch only, fave in 
thofe mftances where heathens are converted; juft as 
circumcifion was among the Jews, &c. &c. 

This church is declared by her works, and by the united 
voice of Proteftants, to be the man of fm, the antichrift, 
fpoken of by Paul and the beloved difciple John. How- 
ever, many, if not mott Proteftants, whilft they have re- 
nounced the power of antichrift, have yet retained more or 
lefs of her abominations. Of thefe, the Rev. Samuel 
Worcefter appears to poflefs a full fhare ; for no one of all 
the individuals who would be thought a Proteftant, ap- 
pears more inclined to fupport, with his full ftrength, the 
broad yet fandy foundation of popery. 

Popery is little elfe, but Chriftianity changed into Juda- 
ism, or pretended Chriftianity Judaized, Judaifm was once 
good, for oiice it was fupported by the laws of Heaven. 
But novv fo far as it is pradifed, it is but will-worfliip, God 
no where commanding it. 

The principal idea which runs through Mr. Worcefter's 
Two Sermons on Gal. iii. 29. hfT/je ^utfible church formed in 
Abraham^ s family y and nvhich for many gtnerattons ivas the 
^fiui/h, h nonv the gofpel church. 

What we ftiall, in the following pages, fee, if the Lord 
give light and opportunity, is, 

1. That the vilible church formed in Abraham's family, 
is not the gofpel church, but quite a different thing. 

IL That Mr. Worcefter hath, to give his Judaizing 
fcheme a femblanoe of truth and confiftency, dared to 
mifapply the word of God, add to it, and to take from it, 
and mtsftate, or to mTreprefent, almoft every thing which 
came within his eager graip. 

It is difagreeable to the writer, and it may be equally 
fo to the reader, that a peribn of Mr. Worcefier*s gcneial 
reputation ihouid fo commit himfelf before the public, as 
to make it an inci'fpenfable duty to rebuke him before all, 
ihiJt others alio n,ay fear. 

My purpofe is, no^ to fpare Mr. Worcefter at the expenfe 
of truth. At the fame time, my wifti is, not to expofe 
him in a finale inftance, where the caufe of Lhiift does not 
demand it. 

Before we attend particularly to what Mr. W(^rcefter 
has written, we will eftabliih the ift. Propolition ; That the 
vifible church, formed in Abraham's family, is not the 
;v,>rpel church, but quite a different thing. 



Two Difcourfisy is'c, 7 

This is evident, i. From the confideration, that the New 
Teftament gives us no intinnation, that any gofpel church 
was ever formed after that in Abraham's family. 

One man of great faith, and hundreds without any 
faith, formed into a church in Abraham's houfe. There 
is nothing like this in all the golpel. Not the leaft hint, 
that a gofpel church was ever formed upon this principle. 

2. The fame thing is evident from ivhat God tells us by 
Mofes, that when the Prophet, Jefus Chrift, fliould come, 
all, who would not hear him, fhould be cut off, (that is, 
cxcluJed) from the church, or be deftroyed from among 
-the people, Deut. xviii. and A<5ls iii. Hence the church in 
Abraham's family, and the gofpel church, are quite differ- 
ent things. One compofed of a great and good man, with 
his unbelieving houfehold ; the other made up of believers, 
and o£ believers only. 

3. From the following confideration, it is manifed, that 
the vifible church in Abraham's family is not the gofpel 
church, but quite another thing. Ifai. liv 13. Ix. 21. 
fpeaking of the gofpel church, tells us, lliat they ihall be all 
taught of God, that they fhall be ail righteous- The 
meaning, no doubt, is, that Chrift's vifible church fhall all 
profefs, and appear to be fo. It was not thus in the church 
formed in Abraham's family. 

The fame thing is true from the confideration, that 
the two churches were founded upon different covenants, 
one was in xhejif/h, the other is in the heart. Gen. xvii. Jer. 
jxxi. If a vifibie church was founded in Abraham's family, 
k was formed altogether upon the covenant of <:ircum- 
cifion. For, afide from this covenant, therewas no more 
appearance of a vifible church in his family, than there 
was in Lot's, or in Job's. If we call Abraham's circum- 
clfed family a church, though it be no where fo called 
from Genefis to Revelation, it fhould be carefully obferved 
of what it was made up, of Abraham a good man, of a 
mocking Ilhmael, of an infant Ifaac, of all the men fervants 
whom Abraham had bought with his money, and of all 
who were born in his houfe, from the oldeft to the new- 
born infant. 

It ought alfo to be well remembered, that not one of 
the feed of thefe fervants, or infants, continued a member 
of the vifible church, fave Jacob, the fon of Ifaac. Henc-e 
it is manifeft, that, notwithftanding the covenant of cir- 
cumciiioa was in tlie flefh of Abraham's family, yet the 



8 . Letters on Rev, S. Worcefier^s 

pr'fvikges and bkjmgs corrprifed in the promifes made to 
him, nvere not^ fey ciijoine right, iheir inheritance.* 

All which gave Abraham's family t:he leaft appearance 
of a viilble churchy in d»ltin<ftion from others, vas their vol- 
untary and involuntary iubnuiTion to the covenant of cir* 
cumcifion, without any faith, in the members, generally, 
as a neceifary qualiiication. 

What gives vilibie appearance to the New Teftament 
church, is her being baptized upon profeffing to have re- 
ceived, whatGcd fays, Jere. xxxi. 33, 34, he will perform 
in her and for her ; viz. ** i will put my law in their inward 
parts, and write it in their hearts, and will be tl eir God, 
a«d they ihaii be my people. — For they Ihall all know me 
frrm ^he lealf of them to the greateft of them, iaith the 
Lord." 

iaeie chivrches appear very different, the one from 
the other. Of the one, a thoufand may be members, be- 
caul'e they belong to a good man's family ; of the other, 
no one can be a vjfible member, but upon his being bap- 
tized upoH a perfonal profeffion of faith ; for not otherwife 
can any one appear to be of the number with whom the 
Lord hath made the new covenant, and of thofe who do 
ivhatfoe'vcr Chrift commands them. * 

5. The Abrahamic church and the gofpel church are not 
the fame ; for what is faid of the latter, as to the quality 
of its members, was never applicable to the former. 

Ifaiah, fpeaking of the gofpel church, fays, liv. 13, " All 
thy children fhall be taught of the Lord." Chrili: men- 
tions this paffage, as defcriptive of his. followers, John 
v. 45 Peter, in his firft epiftle, chap. ii. ver. 9, fpeaking 
to the gofpel church, and defcribing her, fays, ** Ye 
are a chofen generation, a royal priefthood, an holy na- 
tion, a peculiar people." This was never true, in a gof- 
pel fenfe, of the Abrahamic, or Jewifh church. 

Befides, what John faid, Luke iii. 9, of the peculiar 
quality of the trees, which (hould compofe, or be the 
conftituent parts of the gofpel church, and what Paul fays 
of the fame -church. Gal. iii. 26, are totally inconfillent 
with the idea, ihat the Jewifh and gofrel churches are, as 
to the quality of the members of which they are compofed, 
one and the fame church. John fays, " The axe is iaid 

• For the fake of meeting the oppofers upon their own ground, 
I fhall term Abraham's circunicifcd famiy of foldicrs. fervants, &c a 
church ; referving liberty to ihow, hereafter, fliould truth fo requircj^ 
. that it wat not a church. 



Tivo Di/cour/esy tsf'c. 9 

anto the root of the trees ; every tree, therefore, which 
brm re h not forth good fruit, is hewn down." Paul fafs 
to ttK' Galatlan church, " Ye are all the children of God, 
by faith in Chrill Jefus." As evidence of his aifertion, he 
adds their proleffion, which they made at their bapiifm. 
For, fays he, <* as many of you, as have been baptized in- 
to Chriii have put on Chriil." 

6. ChrilVs abolilhing in his flelh the enmity (betweea 
Jews and Gentiles) even the law of commandments, con- 
tained in ordinances, to make in himfelf of twain one ne<w 
many is inconfiftent with the notion, that the gofpel churcll 
is but the Abrahamic church in continuation. Eph. ii," r-j. 

In the next chapter, this matter is, if pofUble, ftill more 
ftrongly evinced. In this chapter Paul tells us, «' That 
the myjlery of Chrift, in other agesy was not made knoivn un- 
to xhefons of men, as it is no'iv revealed unto his holy apof-. 
ties and prophets, by the Spirit ; that the Gentiki Jhould be 
fellow beirSi and of the fame body, and partakers of his prom^ 
i/e in Christ, by the gofpel." Paul further tells us> verfe 9. 
" That the fellowfhip of the myftery from the beginning of 
the world, hath been hid in God." But on fuppofition, 
that the gofpel church is nothing elfe but the Abrahamic 
church enlightened and enlarged, where is the myftery ?, 
For, furely when the church was jirji formed in Altahnm''*- 
familyr a very large part of it was made up of Gentile un- 
believing nnemhers, as churches formed upon: the fame 
model noiv are. Alfo where is the myftery, which hath 
been hid in God, from the beginning of the world, with 
relation to the gofpel church, and the reception of the. 
Gentiles into it, if the church hath, from Abraham's day, 
been what it now ts, fave Ihe hath been favoured with new 
degrees of light, and. more, or larger numbers of Gentiles 
have been addied fince Chrift's incarnation, than were added 
before? If matters be thus, as the adverfaries of the bap- 
tized chuTxh contend, what becomes of what Paul calls a 
newly revealed and long hidden myftery ? But on fuppofi- 
tion that the gofpel church is -einew min, or body, quite a dif- 
ferent tHing from vvhat had ever been in the world before, 
ieftablifhed upon letter promfes^-iixt^ founded upon a. covenant 
very different from that of circumcifion, €v.eTi. upon the 
ne^jo covenant, and" combining' all obedient beiieversj Gea- 
l;iles equviliy as J'ews, and excludin;r every tree, ivhether G^n-^ 
tile or J'tiv, whicil b-rou'^h: not forth good huil, theji here 
would be a myftery. f his v,^ouKt be a thing, never, befonx 

A 2' 



1 o Letters on Rev. S, Worcefler^s 

revealed, or neveV generally underftood before. A myf- 
tery, which had been kept fecret from the foundation of the 
ivnrldy which had been hidden in the bofom or purpofes 
€)f God. This indeed appears to be the myflery. Such a 
myilery is thfs, that, upon its being true, it will fpoil all 
the theories of the advoc ites for modelling the gofpel church 
according to the covenant of ciicumciiion. Either Paul 
miifakes, when he tells us, that a great myftery, with re- 
fpecl: to the churvh, was revealed to him and to the holy 
apoiUes and prophets in his time, or Mr. Worcefter and 
his orethren mi (take, when they tell us, that all things 
have gone on, as they were in Abraham's time, and that 
^e gofpel church is the fame now, as the Jewifh shurch 
was three thoufand years ago ; and that there is no myf- 
tery about tne matter. The public will judge which is 
moll worthy of credit, Mr. Worcefter and his brethren, or ' 
Paul and other apoftles of the Lamb. 

To afcertain this point, and to make it evident, that I 
do not miftake this my (Very, that the gofpel church is a 
new man or body of men^ fiach as the world never faw, till 
Jefus appeared in flelh, and to Ihow, that Mr. Worcefter' 
and his brethren miftake this matter wholly, we wiD add, 

7. The gofpel church is not the vifible church formed 
in Abraham's family, but quite a different thing, as is ev- 
ident from the circumftances, which attended the fetting 
up of the gofpel church. 

1. It was compofed of fuch, and fuch only, as mani- 
feftly, or profefTedly, brought forth good fruit. Never 
was it thus with the church formed in Abraham's family. 

2. It was compofed of fuch, and fuch only, as were 
adually excommunicated from the Jewifh church, or liable 
to be fo, fo far as Jews made any part of it. John ix. 22. 

3. The gofpel church and the Jewifh church were both 
^f them exijling at the fame time, and each oppofed to the other ^ 
for many years ; nor have they ever united to this day. It 

-is therefore an abfurdity to fay, that ihey are one and the 
famey and that the gofpel church is but a c&ntinuation of the 
Jewijh, With equal propriety might I fay, after having 
ere<Sed a new houfe, whiltl: the old one is ftanding in full 
view, they are both one, the new one is but a continuation of 
■the old Aperfonwould be thought infane to talk thus 
about things which now are ; but men of learning and 
reputation may talk thus about things which have lon^ 
fitice been, and be ftill reputed wife. 



Two DifcQUrfesy Ssf^. i i 

A world of additional evidence might b? produced to 
fliow, that the church formed in Abraham's family is not 
the gofpel church, but quite a different thing. But I hafteii 
to lay before the pubHc the inconfiftencies, abfurdities, and 
labyrinth of errors into which this notion hath led Mr. 
Worceller ; and in the mean time, remain, 
The public's devoted fervant, 

For Chrift's and the goipel's fake, &c. 



Ws appeal to the Bible ^ to Jiubborn fa6ls^ and to 
coninion fsnfe. 



LETTER IL 

MEN, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 

It is now gofpel times ; in which Ifaiah tells 
us that the way of holinefs fhall be plain, fo that the way- 
faring man, though a fool, linlearneJ, fnould not err there- 
in. It is, however, to be underitooJ, that thefe wayfaring 
men poflefs humble hearts and willing minds, that they do 
as the Bereans did — fearch the fcriptures daily, that they 
may know the things which are true 

The time is not far off, in which common ChriPtians will 
read for themfelves, think for themfelves, and judge for 
themfelves, that they may know and do the mind and will 
of God. They ought, all of them, to do thus now. The 
writer afks no man to believe a word which he writes, any 
farther than the reader can difcover that truth is in it. 

It is well worthy of the reader's obiervation, that every 
writer, who underilands his fubj- (51 and has truth for his ob- 
ject, may be eafiiy underliood by the reader ; but thofe who 
will not come to the light, leil their evil deeds (hould be 
reproved, ufually confound themfelves and their readers 
too. Truth fears not the light ; but error, like the glow- 
worm, fhines only in the dark. 

To every one who underilands the iirft principles of the 
prefent controveriy, the following is a felf-evident propofi- 
tioM : — Either Mr. Worcefter and his brethren, or my breth- 
ren and myfeif, believe and pra(5tife in oppofition to the word 



12 Letters en Rev^ S. Worcejieri 

of God ; for God's word does not fupport both fides of a 
contradidion. 

The Baptids, and thofe who In our land call tliemfelves 
Paedobapiiits, believe and pradlife, as to their ditiinguiibnig- 
tenets, ni cliredl oppofition to each other. The Baptifts 
believe tliat nurhing is goipel baptilm, but immerfion in 
the name of the Father, .Sec Thofe who call themfelves 
Psedobaptifts, believe that any and every application of 
water in the name of the Father, &c. is gofpel baptifm. 
As they both believe, fo they both pradlfe — ^The Baptifts 
believe, that none but fuch as receive the word gladly, are 
qualified fuhjei^s for gofpel baptifha. Thoie who call 
themfelves P^edob-aptifts, believe, that if all parents were 
"wife and f iilhful, all perfons woii-ld be baptized in infancy ;, 
and, of confequence, all oug-ht to be baptized la unbelief,, 
or before they can receive the word gladly. 

Thus oppofite are thefe two claffes of men. Both can- 
not be right : both cannot, in thefe things, agree with the 
word of eternal truth. It cannot be true, that immerfion: 
©f the whoie body in water is efTential to gofpel baptifm ;. 
and, at the fime time,^ that any and every other applicatioa 
©f water may be gofpel baptifm Nor can it be true, that 
Hone are the qualified fubjevfts of gofpel bap^:ifm5 but fuch as 
receive the word gladly ; and yet, that all ought to be 
baptized, before they know one word from another. 

Before we proceed to lay-open Mr. Worcefter's miftakes, 
nconfrllencies, and abfurdities, the author of thefe pages 
begs leave to notify his readers, that he hath not felected 
Mr. Worcefter's performance, as the one to be particularly 
expofed, becaufe it is materially different from what many 
others upon the fame fubjedt have written, but becaufe he 
hath taken his ground decidedly, and hath laboured to fup- 
port his caufe more than moft have done. 

Mr. Worcefter has, generally fpeaking, built his theory 
upon the principles, and fupported it by the arguments, 
upon which his caufe muft ft and or fall It is hence obvi- 
©us, tliati provided his theory or fentiment cannot be iup- 
ported by the principles and arguments which he hath 
brought forward, not his Sermons only, but aD the boeks 
which his brethren have written in fupport of the fame- 
theory, mull alio fail with them. 

It may be alfo noted, that my principal obje^ is not to 
expofe the antichriftian theory and practice of Mr. Worcef- 
ter and his brethren, but to iiet truth to public view. As 
truth is the beft weapon by which to deilroy error, hence 



Two Difcourfes^ ^c. * 13 

as truth is brought forward, his errors will be ruined. 
Should I on fome particulars be prolix, the importance of 
the fubjed mull be n?y apology to the public. 

As Mr. Worcefter has, profefTedly, built his Sermons, in 
^ppoiition to the Baptifts, on a part of PauPs epiftle to the 
Galatians, it is expedient that we pay particular attentioo 
to this epiftle. 

This epiftle was manifeftly written againft the very error 
which Mr. Worcefter would eftablifh by it. It is true* he 
has refined a little upon Judaifm, and left out the more 
unpopular parts of that yoke of bondage ; but he earneitly 
retains that part which binds to the performance of the 
whole : «• for/* fays Paul, " I teftify to every man that is 
circumcifed, that he is a debtor to do the whole law." 
'Mr. Worcefter afterts, that baptifm hath taken the place 
of circumcifjon, and means the fame thing. The feal, he 
informs u -, is changed, but the thing irfeif is fubfianiiaJIy the 
fame :* hence Mr. Worcefter holds fui/fantially ^to circum- 
cifion, and is therefore debtor to do the whole law. The 
change of a, feal from red lowhke. alters not the nature of 
an inftrument, nor does it leifenits obligation or binding 
force ; hence, juft fo far as Mr. Worcefter is conliftent 
with his own theory, he is the very perfon, or his theory is 
what the Holy Ghoft directed Paul' to condemn, as bemg 
an antichriftian error, among the Galatiuns. 

That the reader may the more fully underftand this, 
matter, and to rnake it the more, eafy to expole and refute 
Mr. Worcefter^s .kidaizing principle, we fliali here fet 
down fo much of the epiftle to the Galatians as will bring 
the error of their antichriftian teachers to view^^ and alfo 
Paul's argument againft them. 

Chap, i ver. i, 2. " Paul, an apoftle, (not of men, nei- 
ther by man, but by Jefus Chrift, and God the Father, 
who raifed him from the dead,) and all the brethren which 
are with me, unto the churches of Galatia. Ver. 6, 7. 
I marvel that ye are fo foon removed from him that called you. 
into the grace of Chrift unto another gofpel : which is not 
another ; but there be fome that trouble you^ and would 
pervert the gofpel of Chrl/lJ* 

Chap. ii. ver.- 3, 4, 5. " But neither Titus, who was with 
rae, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcifed: and that. 
becaufe oi falfe brethren unawares brought in, who came in, 
privily to fpy out our liberty which we have in Chrift Jel^us^j 

* Sec his Sermons, page 55, J 6, 57, &c 



14 Letters on Rev. S. Wjrcejier^s 

that the7 mi^ht bring us into bondage : to whom we gave . 
place hj fiibjedion, «#, not for an hourf th;it the truth ot the: 
gojpel might continue with you. Ver. Ii — 14. But when 
Peter was come to Antioch, / ivlth/lDod him to the fjce^ be- 
caufe hi <was to be blamed. For before that certain came 
from James, he did eat with tlie Gentiles : but when they 
were come, he withdrew, and fcparated liimfelf, fearing 
them which were of the circumcifion. And the other Jews 
dijfemhlcd likc^nfe 'with him ; infomuch that Barnabas alfo 
was carried away with their dijjimulation. But when I fiw 
that tbi-y walked not u'prightly, according to the truth of 
tlie gcjp^ly I faid unto Peter before them all, If thou, heiti^ a 
Jewy livell after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the 
Jeivs, why compcHcJ} thou tlie Gc'niiles to live as do the 
Jeivs ? Ver. 1 6. Knowing that a man is not juftified by 
the works of the law, but by the faith of Jefus Chrift, even 
we have beheved m Jefus Chriit, that we might be jujiijud 
by the faith cf Cbn,?, and not by the ivcrh of the law ; for 
by the <u'crls tf the ia-w Ihall no ficih be juftified. Ver. 2 i. 
I do not frujiratc tlie gr^ice of GoJ : for if righteoujnefs 
come by the ia<u.\ then Chrij} is dead in vain.^* 

Chap. iii. — ** O fr:ijh Ci/atians, who hath bcivitched jOMy 
riiat ye Ihould not obey the truth, before whofe eyes Jefus 
Chrill hath been evidently let forth, crucified among you ? 
This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit 
by the luorks of the laiUy or by th»e hearing of faith ? Are 
ye io foolilli ? having becrun in the Spirit, are ye now made 
perfect by the /iV/y ? ILive ye fulfered fo many things in 
vain P If it be yet in vain. He, therefore, that miniiler- 
cth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, 
doeth he it by the luaris of the iaiUy or by the hearing of 
faith ? Even as Abraham belie^hd God^ and it was account- 
ed to him for rightecufnrfs. Know ye, therefore, that they 
*which are o{ faith, the fame are the children of Abraham. 
And the fcripture, forefeeing that God would juftify the 
heathen through faith, preached before the goipel unto 
Abraham, faying. In thee Jhall all nations be bleff'ed. So then, 
they which be ot faith are blrfed with faithful Abraham. 
For as many as are of the works of the law are under the 
curfe: for it is written, Curfed is every one that continu- 
cth not in all thin»j-s which are written in the book of the 
law to do them. But that no man is jullified by the law 
in the fight of God, it is evident: for, 'VhtjuJ ihall live 
by faith. And the la^u.' is not of faith : but, The man that 
doeth them Ihill live in them. Chrill haih redeemed u«. 



Two Difcourfes^ Iffc, 15 

from the cune of the law, being made a curfe for us ; for 
it is written, Curfed is every one that hangeih on a tree : 
That the bleffing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles 
through Jefus Chrift ; that we might receive the promife of 
the Spirit through faith > Brethren, I fpeak after the man- 
ner of men ; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it 
be confirmed, no man difannuUeth, or addeth thereto. 
Now, to Abraham and his feed were the promiies made, 
lAs faith not. And to feeds, as of many ; but as of one. And 
to thy feedi which is Chrjji. And this 1 fay, that the cov' 
^nant that was confirmed before of God in Chrift, the law, 
which Wdsfour hundred and thirty years after, cannot difan- 
nul, that it Ihould make the promife of none effe<5t. For 
if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more o{ promife : but 
God gave it to Abraham by promife. Wherefore then 
ferveth the law ? It was added becaule of tranfgreffions, 
till the feed fhould come, to whom the prcmife was made ; 
and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a Mediator. 
Now a mediator is not a m.ediator of one ; but God is one. 
Is the law then againft ihe promifes of God ? God forbid : 
for if there had been a law given which could have given 
life, verily righteoufnefs fliould have been by the law. 
But the fcripture hath concluded all under fm, that the 
promife hj faith of J^fus Chrifl might he given to them that 
believe. But before faith came we v/ere kept under the 
\2.wj, fhut up unto the faith which fhould afterwards be re- 
vealed. Wherefore the laiv was our fchaohnafier to bring 
us unto Chrifl, that we might he juflifiedhy faith. But after 
lh?it faith is come^ we are no longer under a fchnolmafcr. For 
ye are all the children of God by faith in Chrjl J if us. For 
as many of you as have been baptised into Chrijl h'd\e put oh 
Chrijl. There is neitlier Jenv m^r Greek, there is neither 
bond noT free, there is neither male nor female : for ye are all 
Qne in Chrift Jeius. And if ye be Chrifi'i, then are ye Abra^ 
ham's fed, and heirs according to the promije." 

Chap, iv ver. 9. — " But now, after that ye have/«9w« 
Gcdy or rathir are knonvn of God, hoiv turn ye again to the 
■<uR'ak and beggarly elements^ whereunto ye defire again to be 
m bondage I Ver. 16, 17. Am I, therefore, become your 
enemy, becaufe I tell you the truth P They %ealovfly affed 
you, but not well ; yea, they would exclude you, that ye 
miglii a%d: them. Ver. 21 — z6. Tell me, ye that delire 
to be v.m'.er the latu, do ye not hear the lanv ? For it is 
written, that Abraham had two fons, the one by a bond- 
maid, the other by a free woman. But he who was of the 



1 6 Letters mReverend 5. Worcejier'^s 

bond-woman was born after the ^^ ; but he oi the free 
tuoman was by promife. Which things are an allegory : 
for Lhele are the t<wo covenants ; the one from the mount Sinai, 
which genciereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this 
Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and anfwereth to Jerufa- 
km which noiv is, and is in bondage with her children. But 
Jerufaiem which is above, is free, which is the mother of 
us ali Ver. 28 — 31. Now ive, brethren, as Jfaac was, are 
the children oi promife. But as then, he that was born after 
the fleth, perfecuted him that was born atter the Spirit, 
evtn fo it ?s no a- Neverthelefs, ivhat faith the fcripture? 
C fl nit the bond IV Oman and her fon : for the fon of the bond- 
mfoman {hM not be heir with the fon of the free tuoman, 
8g lii<Ti hr.thren, we are not children of the bond-woman, 
but oi the fee." 

Chap. V Ver. i, 2, 3, 4. ** Stand faft, therefore, in the 
liberty wherewith Chrift hath made us free, and be not 
entangled again v th the yoie of bondage. Behold, I Paul 
fay unto yuu, That if ye be circumcifed Chr'fi fhall profit you 
nothing. For I teitify again to every man that is circum- 
cifed^ that he is a debtor to do the luhole law. Chrid is be- 
come of no eifedl unto you, whofoever of you are juftilied 
by the law ; ye are fallen from grace, v. 6. For in Je- 
fus Chriit neither circumctfwn avaiieth any things nor uncir* 
cumcifion ; but faith which worketh by love. v. 9. A //'/- 
tie leaven leaveneth the whole lump. v. 11. And I, 
brethren, if yet I preach circumcifon^ why do I yet fuffer ^^r- 
fedution ? then is the o^ence of the crofs ceafed." 

Chap. vi. Ver. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. "^j w^wy as defireto 
make a fair fJjeiu in the flefh, they conflrain you to be cir- 
cumcifed ; only lefl they {hovAdfujferperfcuiicn for the crofs of 
Chrijl. For neither ihey thcmfelves, who are circumcifedy 
keep the law ; but deftre to have you circumcifed^ that they 
may glory in your fieili. But God forbid that I fbould 
glory i fave in the crofs of our Lord J if us Chrifi, by whom the 
world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world. For in 
Chrift Jefus neither circumcfian avaikth any thing, nor «*«- 
circumcifiony but a new creature. And as many as walk 
according to this rule^ peace be on them^ and mercy, and up- 
on the Ifrasl of God.'* 

I have made this 1 ng quotation, that the reader may 
have, direiftly before him, all which Paul wrote in his 
epiitle to the Galatians, relative to the liibjed which is 
nov' agitating the pubhc mind. The laft verfe of the third 
cfiapter; Mr. Worcelter took for his text, on which to biiild 



Two DifcGurfeSy tsfc. ly 

-his Judaizing theory. But neither in his text, nor in any 
other part of this epiftle, is there a word in favour of his' 
legal plan. But on the contrary, the whole of it was writ-, 
ten, purpofely to deftroy fuch a prhiciple, which began to 
work among Chriftians, even in the apoftles' days. 

In this epiftle, Paul mentions two covenants, one con- 
tained in the following, and fimilar words ; " In thee fhall 
all the nations of the earth be bleHed.^' This covenant 
was confirmed of God in Chrift to Abraham, four hun- 
dred and thirty years before the other, the Sinai covenant, 
*/as given ; alfo this covenant of promife was made known 
■to Abraham, more than tnventy years before the injlitution 
of the covenant of circumcifion, whi-ch was afterwards in- 
corporated into the Sinai covenant. Neither of thefe cov- 
■enants hath any thing to do with the covenant of circum- 
cifion, fave the covenant of circumcifion was a token of 
the former, and is included in the latter, and binds the 
fubjeds of it to perform all the legal duties which that en- 
joins. Hence the apoftle A;arcely gives fo much as a hint, 
through the whole epiftle, of the inftitution of the covenant 
of circumcifion. Where he mentions the covenant itfelfi 
it is, to difluade his brethren of Galatia from the pradice 
of it, and to urge them to be wholly feparate from ito 
Greatly the reverfe is it with Mr. W. The covenant of 
-circumcifion is the theme of his difcourfe, and the bafis oii 
which his principle refts ; from the beginning, to the end 
of his Sermons. At the fame time, he fully manifefts 
throughout that he has no correal idea of the covenant of 
circumcifion ; for he continually confounds the covenant 
-of promife with the covenant of circumcifion. Indeed, he 
muft thus confound covenants, or his theory would have 
no plaufibil'ity. 

But I haften to unfold Mr. Worcefter's confufed and 
•abfurd ideas, that the public may be aftonifhed at the 
blindnefs and confufion of many of their leaders. 

The firft confufed and abfurd idea of Mr. Worcefter's," 
which I fhall now mention, is contained in his expofition 
of his text. We will iet down his f ext, and then his expo- 
fition. 

His text is,* " And if ye be Chrijl's^ then are ye Abra- 
ham's feed, and heirs according to the promife.^* His ex- 
pofition follows, * If ye be Chrift^s, then are ye brought 

* Page %, • 



1 8 Letters on Rev. S. Worcejier^s 

into a covenant relation to Abraham, are juftlfied in the 
fame manner in which he was, and are entitled to all the 
privileges and blejffings which were contained in the promifes 
made to him and his feed.' 

That the confufion and abfurdity of this expofition may 
appear, nothing more is neceflary than to mention fome of 
the privileges and bleffings which were contained in the 
promifes to Abraham and his feed. Some of thefe privi- 
leges and bleilings of Abraham's are, that in him all the 
nations of the earth fhould be bleffed ; that he fhould be a 
father of many nations ; that kings fhould come out of 
him ; that the land of Canaan fhould be their pofTefTion ; 
and that Chrift fhould be of them, as concerning the flefh, 
&c. &c.* 

The reader can judge for himfelf, as to the confiftency, 
or abfurdity of Mr. Worcefter's expofition. If every be- 
liever in Chrift be entitled to all the privileges and hlefftngs 
which were contained in the promifes made to Abraham 
and his feed, then is he correal, otherwife abfurd. If ev^ 
ery believer be an Abraham, and if the children of every 
believer be the children of Abraham, &c. &c. then is Mr.* 
Worcefter's notion juft, otherwife it is coiifufed and incon- 
fiflent with common fenfe. ' 

The next thing which I Ihall mention, is one of his falfe 
flatements. It is in the next fentence but one, to the expo- 
fition of his text. . 

• It is,' fays he, * particularly to be remarked, that with a 
view to convince his Galatian brethren, of their unhappy' 
error, in refpe<51: to juftification, he afcends to the memorable 
period of the iniVitution of the church in the family of Abra- 
ham, takes the covenant then made with Abraham and his 
feed, and traces it down in the tranfmiffion of its privileges 
and bleffings to the Gentile church.* 

This propofition is, indeed, as Mr. Worcefler fays, to be 
particularly remarked^ for nothing is more falfe and delufory, 
than is what he here afferts. It is not only far from truth, 
but it is abfurd. 

It is far from truth : for Paul does not afcend to the 
memorable period of the inflitution of the church in the family 
oi Abraham, but to Khe period in which God made to Abra- 
ham this promife, " In thee fliall all nations be bleffed." 
This promife Paul repeatedly brings to view, in the chapter in 
which is Mr. Worcefter's text ; and this promife was made 

* Gen. xii. uA Kvii. Rom. ix. 5. 



Two Difcourfes^ ^c. 19 

more than twenty years before the injiltutton of the church in 
AhrahartCi family. Befides, that Mr. Worcefter might have 
no excufe for miftaking the matter, Paul exprefsly tell us, 
that the covenant, of which he is writing to the Galatians 
and to us, and by which he difluaded them, and by which 
he diifuades us, from adhering to the covenant of circum- 
cifion, was four hundred and thirty years before the law ; 
whereas the memorable period in which a church was infti- 
tuted in Abraham^s family, was not four hundred and ten 
years. Let any who are able compare the dates. 

Further, if a church were inftituted in Abraham's fam- 
ily, it was by the covenant of circumcifion. For, previous 
to the giving of that covenant, there is no more appearance 
of a church in his family than in Job's or Lot's. To fup- 
pofe that Paul referred the Galatians to this covenant, to 
reprove them for their error, in feeking juftification by the 
law, is doubly abfurd ; for their very error confifted in 
adhering to this covenant. Alfo, he told them, that, upon 
their being circumcifed, they were debtors to do the whole 
law. 

The propofition now under confideration is not only 
falfe and abfurd, but delufory. By it Mr. Worcefter would 
teach his own people and the public much as the Judaizing 
teachers taught the Galatians, that except they were cir- 
cumcifed and kept the law of Mofes, they could not he 
faved. He does not ufe the fame words with thefe de- 
ceivers, but the leading ideas through his Sermons appear 
to go upon the fame principle j and in page 52, his words 
come fo nigh, that probably the perverters of the Galatian 
church would not be oiFended at them. His words are, 
« It is not, indeed, certain, that if you be unbelieving and 
difobedient, your children will be finally loft ; for God 
may, as often in his fovereign mercy he does, go out of the 
limits of the churchy and beftow his grace on thofe who are 
aliens from the commonwealth of Ifrael, and ftrangers to 
the covenant of promife. But if, in this cafe, he does 
beftow grace upon your children, it will not be in purfu- 
ance of any covenant engagement to you.* 

This language harmonized but too well with thofe trouh- 
Urs of the church, of whom Paul fays, " / luould they were 
cut oj:' 

Mr. Worcefter's propofition next to that whicji we have 
been confidering (page 8) is, < The apottle's whole argu- 
ment proceeds upon the plain fcripture ground, that the 
covenant which was made with Abraham, and which con- 



20 Lett en an Rev, S* Worcefier^s 

liituted the church in his family, was ftill in force, and was- 
never to be abrogated ; that the Gentile churches were 
embraced in that covenant, as making one with the Jewifh 
church ; and; that, by virtue of that covenant, believers of 
every age and nation were to be cGnfldered as the children 
of Abraham, inheriting, by divine right y all the privileges and 
hlejjings; compriffid in the promi/es made to him and his feed.* 

This proportion contains another of Mr. Worcefter's 
felfe ilatements, delufory fophlfms, and abfurd ideas. This- 
propofition is full of faife ftatements and erroneous afler-. 
tions. I 

In the Jirji place, he confounds the covenant which was 
confirmed of God in Chrift, with the covenant of circum- 
clfion, and gives his readers to underftand that they are 
l>oth one : whereas the Bible tells us that the latter is but 
the token of the former, Gen. xvii. 

In the next place, he tells us, < That the apoftle's whole 
argument proceeds upon the plain fcripture ground, that 
the covenant which was made with Abraham, and which 
corjlituted the church in his family, was ftill in force, and waf 
never to be abrogated.' 

'i he apoftle, in (lead of going, as Mr. Worcefter fays, 
upon the fcripture ground, that the covenant which was. 
made with Abraham, and' which conftituted ^he church in 
his fam.ily, was ftill in force, and never to be abrogated, 
does not, in the whole chapter, fo much, as once mention- 
tliat covenant by which a vifible church was conftituted in 
Abraham's family, unlefs it be to reprove the foolijh Gala-, 
tians, who were giving heed to Judaizing teachers, who 
were preaching among them this covenant of circumcifion. 
- Paul goes, indeed, upon the plain fcripture ground, and 
upon this plain fcripture ground too, that the gofpel church 
was and is built upon the promife made to Abraham lof^g 
before the covenant of circumcifion was ever mentioned,* 
and upon the covenant which was confirmed of God in 
Ghrift four hundred and thirty years before the law, and, 
more than twenty before there was any vifible church 
formed in Abraham's family, or the covenant given upon 
which it was conftituted. What Mr. Worcefter here men- 
tions of the covenant. and conftitution of a church in Abra- 
ham's family, is manifeftly a mere delufory fophifm or 
deception; for the apoftle does not fo much as once inti- 
mate any fuch thing. 

• Sec Gal. iii, S, 17, and Qsji, xii. 3, 



Two Dtfcourfes^ Isfc* 21 

3. In the propofition now under confideralion, Mr. 
Worcefter teils us, that the Gentile churches were "em^ 
braced in that covenr^it, as making one with the Jewifti 
church. Here he comes out, and (hows himfelf to be one 
of the Judaizing teachers : hut the apoftle fays not a word 
of any fuch thing. 

4. Says Mr. Worcefter, * And by virtue of that cove- 
nant, believers of every age and nation were to be confid- 

ered as the children of Abraham.* Reply. The apoftle 

no where fays, that ever any one beiiever, of any age or 
nation, was to be confidered as a child of Abraham by 
virtue of that covenant by which a church was conftituted 
in his family. The apoftle fays, " If ye be Chrtjl^s^ then 
are ye Abraham's feed ;" not^ if ye be eircumcifed, or be 
in the covenant of circumcifton. 

The abfurdity of the idea, in the clofe-of the proportions 
* of believers inheriting^ by divine rights all the privileges and 
hkjftngs comprifed in the promife, made to Abraham and 
his feed," has been already expofed. 

Thus falfe, delufory, and abfurd is Mr. Worcefter's main 
proportion, which leads to and introduces his no leis falfe, 
delufory, and abfurd do<5lrine. 

It may be pleafing and profitable to the reader, to have 
here ftated a few general truths, which relate to the matter 
m hand, and may ferve to explain it. 

1 . It was by virtue of the covenant of grace and promife^ 
which was revealed, and which was confirmed of God in 
Chrift, that Abraham was made a faithful faint. 

2. It was by viitue of the covenant of circumcifion, or 
by Abraham's compliance with it, that he and his family 
were conftituted a vifible church. 

3. It is by virtue of the fame covenant of grace and 
promife, by which Abraham was made a faint, that the 
nations cf the earth aie bleffed iivor by him, and many are 
made believers in Chrift* 

4. It is by virtue of obedience to the ordinances of Jefus 
Chrift, and efpecially to the fir ft, via. baptifm^ that believers 
are conftituted into vifible gofpel churches.: 

The reader under ftanding the above plam truths, we 
will now proceed to eonfider the do3vine^ which Mr. Wor- 
cefter would have us believe to be contained in his text. 

♦ The text, thenv (fays he) thus contemplated, in its con- 
nexion, prefents for our conftderation this great and inter- 
efting do^inCi viz. In God's covenant of promife with Abraham 
»^2 



2 2 Leiten on Rev. S. Wortefte/s 

pre/v'tfien wax made for the conitnuanct of tit church firmed tj 
it ; and thus far the tranfmt/^n of the frroileges and hUJfinfi 
contained in ft, from generancn to gemretiony d^tsm to the tlofe 
of time.* 

That the public may at once (at that tiierer n no c 
neiion between Mx. Worccfter's text and thedoSrifte v^h : . 
be fays it preients, 1 will bore fet down the text, aiud -t 
three veries s«xt preceding. 

Ver. 26. ** For ye are all ihe chiidrcn of God b; 
Jefuj Chri/L" yet, 27. •« For as many c£ jaa. 
been baptixtd into Chrtft ha-ve pa on Chrifi?* 
" There is neitirier Jew ncr Greek, tb^e is neither b 
free, dvere is neither male nor female ; for ye arc all one in 
Chrift Jefus.** Ver. 29. "And ti je\x Bhrifi^s, them tix^^ 
yt yfi^raham'j fed, and heirs aceordiag to the pr&mife" 

la Trerfe 26, Paul tells the Galatian CbrifBans, tbat \hej 
were all the children of God by f^iuth m Chrifi Jefus ; nst 
by circurr^ifion, or by tbe morh of the lavf. In verfe 2 - , 
he gives the reafcn j ** For (fays he) as many of you i.. 
have been baptized into ChnA have /«/ om Chri^/* This 
infants could not do. In Terfe 28, he informs us, that in 
t^ e gofpel church both Jew and Greeks both bond and 
free, both male and female, are all one in Chrift Jefus. 
In the laft verfe, Paul lays, •* And \£ je he Cbrifi*^, then are 
ye Ahraham*: f-d, and heirs according to tbe pronufeJ''* Ac- 
cording to the promije of circumctjiom^ Yes, if Mr. WorceT- 
ter's notions aie corred. But where does he find fuch a 
promife \ in his text ? or in the chapter which contains his 
text I or in the epiille which contains the chapter ? or in 
any other infpired epiftle \ No where ; and the pubhc 
ought to know it. The public ought to be apprifed of 
this : and every one who underftands the matter, ooght tc 
inform his brother, that neither Paul, nor any other infpired 
penman, hath ever told us, th^ the viiible church in Abra- 
ham's family was formed by the covenant which Paul 
mentions repeatedly in the third chapter of his epifile to 
the Galatians. Paul, by mentioning in veric 8, the cove- 
nant CI which he was fpeaking, and by fixing in ^^!4h9N 
the date of it, ct the time of its being manifefted m^H^ 
firmed to Abraham, explicitly, or with great plainoeisy^t^liV 
us that he meant no fuch thirjg. . ' .* 

- A few confequences will now be ftated. 

I. Mr. Worcefter appears to have mifonderftood his 
dext wholly^ not. a iingle idea being fotmd is it as he fup- 
polcd^ 



Two Difcourfesy ^c. 2.3 



2. Mr. Worcefter appears to have wholly miliinderflood 
the covenant of which Paul i'peaks, in the chapter whence 
he took his text ; this covenant being completely diftinft 
from the covenant which g^ve vifihiiity to the church in 
Abraham's family. 

3. .Mr. Worceiter is manifeftly far from inotomg, that 
the thing,, and the only thing, which conftitnted Abraham's 
family into a vifible church, was his circumciimg, at God's 
command, all the males in his houie. Had Mr. Worcefter 
have known this, he would have difmilfed his Sermons 
before he delivered them, and not fo darkened counfel by 
words without knowledge. 

4. It is manifeft, tiiat Mr. Worcefter is full in fentiraent 
vith thofe who troubled, the Galatian churches ; and that 
he hath perverted his text and the iGtention of the apollle, 
that he might defend the very herefy which Paul laboured 
to deftroy. For ail which thofe -^daizing teachers en» 
deavoured, was to bring the goipel church to the ftandard 
of the Jev/ilh ; and what Mr. Worceiter endeavours is,- for ■ 
fublcance, the fame thing.* 

The public, and every reader, i?. deiired-to hear me^ 
patiently ; for, if the Lord will, I have many things yet to 
fay, that I may, through the grace of the JLcrd Jefus, 
deliver many from the Judaizing tenets of Mr. Worcefter 
and his brethren. 

In the mean time, may Jefus pofTefs my heart, and the- 
public my be ft wiihes and zealous Inbour for their good. 

I am, &:c. 



We appeal to the Bible^ to fiublKrn fails ^ and ts 

common finfe. - * 



LFTTEK III 

MEN, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 

IN my lafl I fet before you Mr. Worceller's 
text, doctrine, and feveral things connocled with them y 
aad mentioned the covenant of which Paul fpake, an<t 

• Sec page S, 9, aad every other page ia hi« Samoiu. 



24 Letters on Rev. 5. Worcefter^s^ 

Shewed how Mr. Worcefter miftook the whole matter. Ir» 
this you may expect to find the manner in which he handle* 
his fubje<5|f, and fome of his arguments, expoied- 

His general method of difcourfe was, 

* I. To Ihow that the covenant which was made with. 
Abraham, and by which the church was formed in his 
family, was intended to be perpetual, or to continue 
throughout all generations j and,- 

' IL To fliow more particularly what provifion was 
made in that covenant for the continuance cf the church 
formed by it, and for the tranfmifllon of the bleffings con^ 
tained in it.' 

His next words are, * It cannot be neceflary, in a la- 
boured manner, to prove^ that by the covenant made with 
Abraham, a church was formed in his family.* Here he 
takes for granted, or as not neceflTary to be in a laboured 
manner proved, the very fubjeB which, of all others, it 
became him to prove thoroughly, if he GG¥dd. Had be 
but proved, of will he now prove, that the confirmation o£ 
that covenant, of which Paul fpeaks, GaL iii. 8, 17, or 
that the being adually. interejled in that covenant was what 
conftituted Abraham and his family a vifible church, thea 
would we grant him all he alks. But ftubborn fads will 
forever keep it beyond his power to prove any fuch thing. 
For, as has been before obferved, the promife that all the 
families of the earth Ihould be blefTed in Abraham, and 
this covenant alfo was confirmed, and yet there was no^ 
vifible church in his family for more than twenty years 
after r nor was it conftituted till the covenant of circum- 
cifion was given, and in full practice. Thefe are ftubborn 
fa6ts, which Mr. Worceftet cannot remove, till he blot out 
the page of revelation. — ^Thus the firft principle, and the 
whole foundation, on which he biwlt his difcourfes, and his» 
oppofition againft the gofpel church, being removed, we 
might leave the fuperftrudure to fall of itfelf, were it not 
that he has many difmgenuous remarks and unfoundetl 
aifertions fcattered through the whole of it. 

Mr. Worcefter has done as is ufual for the ingenioufly 
erroneous to do ; in the firft place, take for granted the Jirjl 
principles which were neceffary to be proved, yet incapable 
of proof, and then proceed with confideraWe plaufibility. 

Says he, (page 10) * Several arguments in fupport of 
the proportion, that the covenaiit made with Abrahan* 
and his feed, and confequently the church formed by it, 
did not ceafe on the introdudion of the gofpel difpenfsition,. 



Tvjo Difcourfes^ "tsfc, - 25 

but were intended to continue throughout all generations, 
I. will now, my brethren, fubmit to your coniideration.'' 

It is fufficient juft to remark, that the covenant whichi 
gave vifible exitlence to the church in, Abraham's family^ 
did ceafe, and was never intended to continue in the vifible 
church of God, but till, the feed Ihould come to whom the- 
promife was made. Paul is my firft witnefs, Gal. v. 3., 
** If ye be circiimcifed Chrift fhall profit you nothing."' 
Paul is my fecond witnsfs, i Cor. vii. 18. "Is any calledj 
in uncircumcifion ? let him not become circumcifedy This^ 
covenant of ctrcumcifion was the only covenant which gave 
vifibility to a church in Abraham's fr^mily. Paul told all 
believing Gentiles, and all Jews, who were not circumctfed, 
that they ought not to keep this covenant, it ought,., 
therefore, to have ceafed ; and it did generally, fave where- 
Paul's oppofers kept it alive. My third witnefs is, the apof- 
ties, elders, and the whole church at Jerufalem^ who ie-nt 
to the Gentiles, thai they need not obferve the covenant of.cir-^ 
cumcifion. See Ads xv. 

Mr. WorcePcer's arguments are now to be confideredf. 

His firji is, * By the covenant made with Abraham, he 
was conftituted the father of all them that believe.' 

Anfnusr, No perfon, who underftands the qontroverff 
between thofe who hold to the gofpel difpenfation, and. 
thofe who plead for the continuance of the Jewilh, will 
deny the truth of the proportion, which contains Mr. Wor- 
cefter's firft argument ; but every perfon who has any con- 
fiderable knowledge of the fubjed, will deny that the argu- 
ment hath any ccnne.xion with the thing to be pi-oved by 
it. Let Mn Worcefter only prove, that Abraham was, by. 
the covenant of circumcifion, conftituted the father of all 
them that believe, and we will grant his argument to pof- 
fefs weight ; but till he does, his argument is defervedly 
confidered without force# 

But, fays he, page 12, * If we be members of a different 
church, formed by a different covenant from that of Abra- 
ham, what relation have we to Abraham ? in what refped 
are we his children ? how is it that we are blelfed with 
himr* 

jinfwer. Not by being in a vifible church ftate, either 
Jewifh or Chriftian ; but by being the children of God by 
faith in Chrift Jefus, Gal. iii, 25, 29, and according to the 
promife. Gen. xii. 3. xxii. 18. Befides, Abraham pofTeffed 
faith, and received the promifes, not whilft in a church 
ftate; not in circumci/Jon, but in uncircumcifion*. Jafl fo, if 



26 Letters on Rev, S. Worce/ier*s 

ever we be blefTed with faithful Abraham, it fliould be^ 
not while we be in a church flate, but before we be bap» 
tized ; then we may receive baptifm as Abraham did cir- 
cumcifion, as a feal of the righteoufnefs or fmcerity of our 
faith. Nor did Abraham, as Mr. Worcefter (page 12) 
would have us believe, receive the promifes, while being 
the covenant father of a vifible church ; for when he re- 
ceived the promifes there was no vifible church. 

His fecond argument is, * God's coi>enant of promtfe with . 
Abraham eomprifed all the bleffings and privileges ever - 
promifed to believers and to the church.' 

Suppofe we grant all this too, what bath it to do with 
the butinefs on hand ? how does it fhow that the gofpel 
church is but the Jewifh church in continuation ? for the 
covenant of promife was confirmed of God in Chrift, and 
made manifeft to Abraham, before the Jewiih church ex- 
if^ci } and the bleffings and privileges promifed to believers^ 
may be enjoyed by the gofpel church after the Jewifh is 
abolifhed. 

Says Mr. Worcefler, page 14, * I will eflablifh my cove- 
nant between me and thee, and thy feed after thee, fays 
the LoitJ to Abraham, for an everlafling covenant, to be » 
God unto thee, and to thy feed after thee ; and in thee, 
^nd in thy feed fhall all the nations of the earth be blefTed.* 
All this is true ; but what, in particular, hath this to do 
with the conflituting of Abraham's family into a vifible 
church ? Mr. Worcefter fubjoins, * Tlicfe promifes, my 
brethren, are of vaft comprehenfion.' Certainly they are. 
I'hey, by implication, comprehend all the bleffings and 
privileges which have been enjoyed by the Jewi(h church ; , 
and all which have been, or fhall be, by the gofpel church. 
Yet there is not fo much as the leafl hint, in any one of 
them, that they comprehend what he brought them to 
prove — that the Jewilh and gofpel churches are one and 
the fame church. 

Again, fays he, on the fame page,. * To Abraham and 
his {^t^y fays the apoftle, were the promifes made. To 
Abraham and his feed, comprehending MefSah, and all 
true believers as included in him, were made the promifes,. 
which comprife all the bleffings ever to be conferred upon 
the clmrch and people of God.' If we grant all this, flill 
it hath nothing to do with the point in c^ueflion, fave it be 
in his application of it, to deceive tke credulous^ and au^ 
meat the darkriefs 4yf the bhnd. • . 



Two Difcourfes^ Isfc. 27 

Mr. Wercefter adds, < Was this covenant then, To vaftly 
comprehenfive with refpe<5l to its bleflings, ever to be abro- 
gated ?* We reply. Surely not. 

He afks again, * Was the church which was formed by 
it, and fo richly endued, ever to be abolifhed V Our anfwer 
is, Firft, the vifible church in Abraham's family was never 
formed by this covenant ; and fecondly, that the Abia- 
hamic church was never fo richly endued, nor was ever 
any other church, as Mr. Worcefter fuppofes. The prom- 
ifes were not made to Abraham and the church, Jewifli or 
Chriftianv but to him and his feed, which is Chrift. 

He again aflcs, * Was thereto be another t:ovenant, com- 
prehending more and greater bleflings, another church, 
more largely and richly endued V Our reply is, No, no. 

But 1 am tired of fuch queftions, which are wholly from 
the point. Mr. Worcefter appears to have forgotten his 
fubjeft, or to have no argument which is applicable. 
Should he tell us that the Englifti are white, and therefore 
the Africans are of the fame complexion, his pofltion and 
argument would be of equal aptitude and force with what 
he hath as yet faid. 

His note, pages 17, 18, fliould have a moment's atten- 
tion, for by it, it is manifeft that he is w holly omacquainted 
with the fentiments of his opponents, as to the covenant ef 
promife, mentioned Gen. xii. 3. xxii. 18. Gal. v. 8, 17.- 
and in many other places. * As nothing (fays he) could 
be more unfounded, fo nothing could be more derogative 
of the honour of the God of Abraham, than the fentiment, 
that the covenant made with Abraham and his feed was 
only a temporal covenant, and included only temporal 
bleflings.* Had he been but fmally informed as to the 
Baptift fentiment, with relation to the above mentioned 
covenant of promife, he could never have honefl:ly fuggeft- 
cd, that they hold the fentiment which he in his note im- 
plicitly charges to their account* 

Mr. Worcefter's third argument is now to be confidered, 
and it is in thefe words — * The covenant made with Abra- 
ham and his feed, is the covenant of which, in the New 
Teftament, Chrift is faid to be the Mediator, and which is 
deiignated as the covenant to be eftabliflied with die church 
in the days of the gofpel. For this is the covenant that I 
will make with the houfe of Ifrael, After thofe days, faith 
the Lord, I will put my laws into their mind, and write 
them in their hearts : and I will be their God, and they 
&all be nif people/ Verj well; bat this n aoC the cove- 



^R Letters on Rev» S. Worcejler^s 

fiant of circumcifion, by which the Jewifli church was con» 
ftituted, or by which Abraham's family was formed into a 
vilible church. This is the new and better covenant, which 
hath better promifes than had the covenant of circumcifion. 
We ftill fee that Mr.Worcefter's argument ma4ccs nothing 
to his purpofe. 

Page 19, he tells us, * The Sinai covenant, the Mofaic 
Jaw of commandments contained in ordinances, as it was 
added but for temporary purpofes, has waxed old, and is 
vaniflied away.' Then the covenant of circumcifion is gone 
with it.: for, fays Paul, " I teftify to every man that is cir*- 
cumcifed, that he is a debtor to do the <whoIe laiuy* Gal. v. 3. 

What Mr. Worcefter afferts in pages 19 and 20, ought 
to arreft the attention of the public ; for in -thefe pages he 
hath, to carry his Judaizing fcheme, diredly contradi<5ted 
the word of the Lord by both Jeremiah and Paul. His 
words are, * As the Lord faid to Abraham, / will ejlahlijh 
my covenant hei^ween me and thee^ and thy feed after thee', — to he 
a Cod unto thee, and to thy feed after thee ; fo he faid to Ifrael 
in Egypt, I will take you to me for a people, and / will be to 
you a God ; and fo he faid concerning the houfe of Ifrael 
and tlie houfe of Judah in the days of the gofpel, I will put 
my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts i 
and I will be their God, and they fhall be my people. 
The covenant, or the great and leading promife of the covenant^ 
as exprefTed in thefe federal inflames, is thi fame,-^On the 
Jlightefl infpeSion, it is plain that the covenant, mentioned in the 
ftveral inftances now before us, is one and the same ;— and 
in each of the inftances, the great promife is, To be a God io 
the church, and to the seed of the church,* 

Here Mr. Worcefter hath dared to <:ontradi<S the word 
of the Lord in direct terms ; and to this he hath been com- 
pelled, that he might fupport his Judaizing fcheme, his 
antichriftian error. 

The word of the Lord is, Jer. xxxi. 31, 32, 33, "Behold, 
the days come, faith the Lord, that T will make a new cov" 
enant with the houje of Ifrael and with the houfe of Judah ; 
NOT according to the covenant that I made with their fathers^ 
in the day that I took them by the hand, to bring them 
out of the land oi Egypt ; (which my covenant they brake, 
although I was an hufband unto them, faith the Lord \) 
but this fhall be the covenant that I will make with the houfe 
•f Ifrael, After thofe days, faith the Lord, I will put my 
law in their kiward part^, and write it in their hearts ; and 
will be the^ft- God, and. they fhall be my people." Here 



Two DifcQurfes^ &f^. - 29 

Mr. Worcefter afTerts, that God's covenant with the houfe 
of Ifrael in Egypt ^ and in the days of the gofpeU are one 
and the same. God faith, that the one is not according to 
the other. 

The word of the Lord by Paul, Heb, vili. 8, 9, 10. is, 
^' Behold, the days come (faith the Lord) when I will 
make a new covenant with the houfe of Ifrael, and with the 
houfe of Judah^ ^■oT according to the con)enant that I made 
mj'ith their fathers^ in the day when I took them by tlie hand 
to lead them out of the land of Egypt, Sec, 

How long ihail the religious world be deceived, by men 
w4io make a bufinefs of wreftLng, perverting, and contra- 
<ii6ling the word of the Lord ! 

Mr. Worcefter not only wrefts, perverts, and contradicts 
the fcriptares, but he alfo adds to them, as we fhall have 
repeated occaficn to ihow. One inftance we have in the 
words }uft quoted from page 20 ; * And (fays he) in each . 
of the inftances, the great promife is, To he a God to the 
church, and to the feed of the chiwch/ — * To be a God to the feed 
of the church.^ This ts clear addition, for which he hath rea- 
-fon to exped God will reprove him. For in this inftance 
he not only adds to God's word, but manifeftly contradids 
it. For, fays Paul, Gal. iii. 16. "To Abraham and his 
feed were the promifes made. He faith not, And to feeds, 
as of many ; but as of one. And to xXvj feed, which is Chrift." 
Befides, if the great promife is to the feed of "the church, 
what then became of this promife, as to xh^ feed of the church, 
in Abraham^ s family ? Out of perhaps a thoufand members, 
only the feed of Ifaac manifeftly blefted, and but one of 
his, even Jacob. Into what abfurdities does Mr. Worcef- 
ter's theory drive him ! 

Page 23, fays he, * So plain from the fcriptures it is, 
*that the covenant made with Abraham is continued under 
the gofpel, and therefore that the church formed hy it is 
alfo ftill continued.' As Mr. Worcefter fat out with con- 
fufed ideas, or without any idea, of that covenant by which 
a vifible church was conftituted in Abraham's family, fo 
he proceeds on in darknefs. His argument in plain £nglif[i 
is this — The covenant which God made with Abraham, to 
l)e a God to him and to his feed, is continued under the 
gofpel ; therefore the church formed by the covenant of 
•circumcifion is ftill continued. Here his antecedent and 
■confequent have no connexion : the one is true, the -ether 
falfi. 

V C ■ ,- 



JO Letters on Rev, S, Worcejier^s 

Mr. Worcefter's note? page 23, is not pleafmg, for it is 
not true. The principal idea in it is, * From this fource 
'(the un/criptura/ l/Iending e£ the Abrahamic and Sinai cove- 
nants together) fprang the error of the legal Jews, in for- 
mer ages ; and from this fame fource has fprung the error 
of the deniers of the Abrahamic covenant and church, or the 
Ahtipscdobaptifts, in modern times.* 

Anjiuer, A more unjuft ftatement, or a more illiberal 
fuggeftion, I prefume was never made by the man of fm. 
But before we fhall have done with Mr. Worcefter, we 
fhall find he has many fimilar ones. •As to the legal Jews, 
yie will pafs them ; but as to the Antipaedobaptifts, we aflc, 
Do they, in modern times, or did they ever at any time, 
deny the Abrahamic covenant ? Our arifwer is. No : nor is 
Mr. Worcefter able to mention a time in which they denied 
it. They deny his perverted ufe of it. They deny that 
the covenant which was manifefted to Abraham in Ur, or 
Haran, and which was cbiifirmed of God in Chrift four 
hundred and thirty years before the law, was that covenant 
by which a vifible church was formed in Abraham's family. 
But they have never denied, nor have they the leaft inclina- 
tion to deny, that covenant, which promifed to Abraham, 
that in him irid in his feed all the nations of the earth 
(hould be bleflfed t nay, th*ey believe in this covenant, and 
hope to (hare iri the bleffings contained in it. 

How long fhall thofe who" lead God's people, caufe them 
to err from the right ways of th^ Lord I 

I am, Sec. ' 



We^a^altc the Bible y to Jhibborn fafts^ and f9 
common fenfe. 



a 0' .=> 



LETTER IV. 

.■ J* ' - - ','-'- 

> l; OU will, no doubt, join wttli inein fenti- 

ment, that Mr. Woreefter's arguments ought to be critically 
examined ; and that when a ruler in Ifrael comes fcrward, 
with fet purpofe to tmpofe bis errors on the public, hiii 



Two Difcourfes^ Iffc, ^ 31 

arguments Ihould be fully inveftigated and thoroughly re- 
futed. I muft, therefore, call your attention to his next 
argument, which is, — 

Fourth. * The church under the gofpel is uniformly in 
the fcriptures reprefented as being the fame church, or ^ 
continuation of the fame church, which was formed in the 
family, of Abraham.* 

The propofitions on which he formed his preceding ar- 
guments we have cheerfully granted to be true, and fhowed 
that they have no relation with his fubjed, which he would 
eftablifli by them ; but this argument, or the propofition 
on which it is built, has no truth in it. The fcriptures give 
no fach reprefentation, as Mr. Worcefter here tells us that 
they uniformly do ; at leaft, I find no fuch place. I find 
no place where the fcriptures give fo much as a diftant hint 
that the church under the gofpel is but a continuation of 
the Jewifh church. The fcriptures explicitly teftify juft 
the contrary from what Mr. Worcefter aiferts — But we 
will hear him illuftrate and enforce his argument a little. 

Says he, page 24, * It would be very remarkable inde^, 
if this was not the cafe. It would be very remarkable 
indeed, if, in the fcriptures, Abraham and his feed wepe 
• reprefented as making two or more diftindt and quite dif- 
lerent families^ or if the children of Abraham under the 
j^ofpel, who are only heirs according to the promife made 
to him, were reprefented as compofmg a church„ entirely 
diftinft^^and different from that which w^s founded in the 
family of their father : but fuch a reprefentation is, in the 
fcriptures, no where to be found.' 

Thus Mr. Worcefter comes out in full, that the gofpel 
church is but a continuation of the church formed in Abra- 
ham's fjamily. We might have left him to poffefs his 
opinion in quietnefs, had he not have attempted to per- 
fuade the public that the fcriptures fay the fame thing $ 
but as the matter is, we wifh the public, and Mr. Worcefter 
alfo, to hear a few words, which the fcriptures fay on this 
fubjeft. 

Paul, fpeaking of the Jews and Gentiles, and of the 
church as made up of both, fays, Eph. ih 14, 15. ** For 
he (that is, Chrift) is our peace, who hath made loib ont^ 
and \)t!\\kiibrtihen doivn the .middle ntmU oi partition between 
us ; having -ah'^l'ifhed in his- flefh the enmity, even the law of 
commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in 
^'trtifelj Qf{ twainoNK NRtF mahV Here, if I underftand the 
apoftle corredly, and the public will judge, Paul dire^ly 



3;2 Letters on Rev. S. W(ircejler*'s 

contradidls -u^hat Mr. Worcefter affirms the fcriptiires uni- 
formly reprefent. Mr, Worcefter fays the goipel church is 
the eld one continued, the apoftle fays it is a new one : the 
pubh'c willjudge whether Mr. Worce'fter or Paul is to be 

credited.. ,•>.>-' 

Daniel) ch-. ii. 44. whllft interpreting Nebuchadniezzar's 
dream., fpeaking ©f the go/pel church cr kingdom, fays, 
"And in the days of thefe h'tngs: fhall the God of heaven fet up 
a kingdom^ which fliall never be deftroyed: and the kingdom 
ihall not be left to other people, but it ihall break in pieces- 
and confume all thefe kingdoms, and it fljall ftand forever.**' 
Here the prophet Daniel fays, " The God of heaven Jlsall fet 
up a kingdom,''^ within a certain limited period, between the 
exiftence of the Babylonifh kingdom and the deftrudicn of 
the Rom.an. Mr. Worcefter fays, the God of heaven fnali 
continue, enlighten, and enlarge the <7/<;^ yetvijh kingdom^ or 
church. The public will believe vvhom they pleafe, Mn 
Worcefter, or the prophet Daniel. 

Jefus Chrift faid to the Jews, "Matt. iv. 17. "Repents 
£oT the kingdom of heaven (the gojpel church) is at hand." 
Mr. Worcefter fays, The o/d Je^^^p church, or kingdoni, 
"^'as about to be revived: " icv v.. 

"' Again, fays the Lord, John iii! 3. "Except a than 'be 
born again, he cannot fee the kingdom of God :** that is, 
none but fuch as are born again, are qualified fubjeds for 
the kingdom of God, or can be interefted in its bleflingsi 
Mr. Worcefter, if I do not miftake him, fays. If the good 
man of the houfe believe, all who are in his houfe may fee. 
the kingdom of God, or do * by divine right inherit all the 
hhjfmgs and privileges of the gof pel churchy this kingdom of Gcd* 
The public will ftill judge whom to believe. 

" The fcriptures fay, that the converted Jews were, in the 
apcftles' days, added to the gofpel church (A<5ts iii.) Mr.. 
Worcefter fays, the Jewifh and gcfpel churches are 0/7^/. 
and of confequence, the converted Jews could net be added 
to the gofpel church, for they belonged to it from their 
childhood or infancy. 

' The apoftle to the Hebrews, ch. >xiii. 10. fays,.** We have 
an tf//<3:r,' whereof //?-?)' have no rfght to eat nvhe ferve the 
tdbernacie :^* that is, thofe who abide with the. jfeivijfh churchy 
h'Ave no right X.0 gofpel ordinances. Mr. Worcefter fays, the 
Chriftian altar and the Jewifti tabernacle are fubftantially 
the iame, or the Jewifh and gofpel churches are both one ;, 
and therefore, fuch as ferve the one, have a right to eat of 
the other». 



Two Difcourfesy l5?c, 33 

Tills is but a fmall fample of Mr. Worcefter's difagree- 
ment with the fcriptures : we fhall fee more foon. 

In pages 24, 25, Mr. Worcefter gives us a large quota*- 
tion from the fixtieth chapter of Ifaiali. He brought it 
forward to prove that the Jewifti and gofpel churches 
are one and the fame. He tells us, * that the whole chap- 
ter is in point, but a part may fuffice as a fpecimen.' Had 
he given us the whole, every reader might have feen that 
foery part was out of point, as to what he would prove by 
it. Th€ 2 ift verfe informs Mr. Worcefter, that this chapter 
knows nothing of this Judaizing fcheme. The prophet 
addrefles this chapter to the gofpel church ; and in verfe 
21, fays to her, • Thy people aifo fliali be all righteous,^* 
This was never true of the Jewilh church, nor of any church 
formed after the model of the Jewifh. This promife was 
never made concerning the Jewifh national church ; but 
to Zion, th$ people of God, for the comfort of the pious 
few, who were waiting for the con/alation of the fpiritual 
Ifraelites. This promife does not belong to any church, 
nor was it ever fulfilled to any, fave to the gofpel church, 
to the church formed according to the contunandment and 
pattern given — of none but believers. Thus, had Mr. Wor- 
cefter quoted the whole chapter, it would not only have been 
totally from his purpofe, but it might have been feen by 
all his readers, that the promifes in it did not apply to the 
old Jewiih church, nor to the modern Jewifh churches, like 
bis own, and all others which are compofed of believing 
parents and their unrighteous children ; but to the churciy 
whoUe members are bnpti^zed upon a profeffion of faith, or 
upon their being manifeftly all righteous. 

Mr. Worcefter's other remarks and fcripture pafTages, 
under this argument, appear equally applicable with the 
above ; not one of them having any relation to the fubje€b 
which he wilhes to prove. When a man fets off in a wrong 
4ire<5tion, he gains nothing by continuing his courfe. 

Mr. Worcefter's Jfth argumentative propofttion is, 

* ITiie covenant made with Abraham b exprefsly declared 
to be an everlaft^ing or perpetual covenant ; a covenant to 
continue to the latefl generations,* 

Reply. By covenant, muft be here meant, either — firft, 
that covenant which, by way of eminence, and on , account 
of the promifes contained in it, is called the covenant of 
grace ; or, fecondly, the covenant of circumcifion. If t^e 
firA he intended, we by no means deny but itf is aa ever- 
c 2 



3^ Letters on Rev. S. Worcejier^s 

lafting covenant, and never in time nor in eternity to be 
forgotten : yet this covenant is not, as has ah-eady been 
fully fhown, what gave vifibility to a church in Abraham*s 
family. If the fecond be the one meant, then its everlaft- 
ing continuance is equal to the everlafting inheritance 
which was given to the feed of Abraham in the land of 
Canaan. This covenant of eircumcifion was commanded, 
a-nd this promifed inheritance in the land of Canaan was 
given, in Gen. xvii. Both are faid to be everlafting, yet 
in a limited fenfe : for when the Romans, under Titus and. 
Vefpafian, deftroyed the Jewifh church and nation, their 
inheritance was removed, and their covenant of eircumcifion^ 
was of no ufe^ fave to continue them a diftin(5^' people, that 
they might be a reproach, a taunt, and a by-word, among 
ali nations ; and alfo to make it- manifeft in future, thiU: 
Govi's predidions by the prophets were of him. But the 
public is^defired lo notice, that whatever Mr. Worcefter 
might, intend by the everlafting covenant, that it hath noth- 
ing to do with the main objed which he would eftablifh by 
it, namely, that the gofpel church and Jewiih are one and 
the fame church : for that covenant by which the Jewifh 
ohurch was conftituted, had nothing to do witli the forma- 
tion of the gofpel chureh* 

After Mr, Worcefter had adduced as many texts as he 
pleafed, which were foreign from his point, he fays, page- 
3-1, * Such, my hearers, is a compendious view of the fcrip- 
ture proofs, that the covenant whrch was made with Abra- 
ham, and by which the church was conftituted in his fam- 
ily, was intended to be perpetual', or to continue throughout 
all generations. I fay, a compendious view ; for in order 
to give an ample and complete view, we fhould be obliged 
to prefent the whole fcriptures in their connexion. The 
whole fcriptures, in their connexion teftify, that Abraham 
is, under God, the father of the church ; that to him and 
his feed all the prom ifcs were made ; that the church, built 
on the foundation oi the apoftles and prophets, is one ;, that 
the covenant confirmed in Chrift, with Abraham and his 
feed, four hundred and thirty years before the commence- 
ment of the Mofaic difpenfation, was never to be drf- 
anTiulled.' 

Here Mr. Worcefter does, as he has done in all his pre- 
ceding arguments, mix truth and error together. We all 
grant, and fully believe, that the covenant which was con- 
firmed of God in Chrift four hundred and thirty years 
before, the law, was never to be difannulled. But we ali 



^vja Difcourf€s\ i^c- ^$ 

deny, and fully difbelieve, that the church in Abraham's- 
family was formed by the giving or by the obferving of 
that covenant; and Paul, as wa have already obfetved,, 
Ihows us, and declares to us, by giving us the y>ear in whiohi 
that covenant was confirmed, that*, it was not-- At.the time 
of the confirmation of this covenant, there was no vifible 
church in Abraham's family, nor for many years after. 

Mr. Worcefter has,''through all his arguments, taken foi* 
granted the only thing which it was neceilary to prove. 
Had he only proved this one thing, namely, That the cov- 
^enant of promife, which was manifefted to Abraham in: 
Ur, or Haran, and confirmed in Chrift four hundred and 
tliirty y-ears before the law, was the covenant which confti- 
tuted his family into a vifible church ; and that all believ- 
ers, who are interefted in this covenant in gofpel times, 
are, of neceifary confequence, in the vifible gofpel church ; . 
and that the being intereiled in this covenant, did in Abra- 
ham's time, and does in gofpel tin'jes, conftitute the favoured- 
perfons, and no others, members of the vifible church;- 
then would we not have contended with him againft the 
onenefs and famenefs of the Jewifh and^ gofpel churches. 
But he has done no fuch thing v. nor does lie appearto have 
done any thing elie, fave it be to prove what no Baptift 
denies, and then to tak^e for granted what neither faint nor 
finner fhould ever believe. He proves, that the covenant 
which was confirmed of God in Chrift four hundred and< 
tliirty years before the law, was never to be difannulled. 
This we all believe.— He takes for granted, that the Jeivifh 
churchy which was- inftituted upon the covenant of circum- 
cijioriy is one and the fame thing with the gofpel churchy whofe 
members are, as tt^e prophet declared they Ihould be, all 
righteous. THisVno perfon ought to believe. 

Had he, undertaken to prove, that the church of Rome^. 
and that the Protdlant church, generally, are formed after 
the model of the old Jewilh church, we fhould have be- 
lieved the fa6l, whether his arguments were to the pointer 
not ; for th^ fadl is intuitively evident. But he muft not 
only pervert, add to, anddiminifiifrom, but he muft change 
the fcripture, before he can proie that the Jewilh church 
and the gofpel church are one and' the fame* 

Mr. Worceftcr's arguments, and the manner in which he 
handles the word of God, have repeatedly brought to my 
mipd the words of Jeremiah, ch. v. 31. ** The prophets 
prophefy falfely^ and the priefls hear tule by their means i and- 
my people love to have it^fa,^* I -.: 



2,6 Letters on Rev. S. Worcejler's 

In my next, we (hall fee Mr. Worcefter altering and 
changing fcripture, to bring it to his purpofe ; together 
with Ibme o^ his continued inconfiftency. In the mean 
time, i wifn to be 

The pubhc's, in the fervice of the Lord Jefus, &c. 



We appQal to the Bible ^ to fiuhborn fa£ls^ and to 
common fenfe. 



LETTER V. 

MEM, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 

In my laft you were promifed, that in this 
you fhould fee fome of Mr. Worcefter's altering and chang- 
ing the fcriptures, to bring them to his purpofe. — We have 
already feen how he confounds, mingles, and mifapplies 
tovenants ; we will now fee how he alters the token of the 
covenant of promiie, and how he changes promije into prO' 
pofal. In Ihort, we may fee how he turns every way, to 
carry his error in oppofition to the gofpel, and to perfuade 
his readers to believe his Judaizing fcheme. 

The inftances which I am about to lay before you, may 
ferve as famples of his altering and wrefting the fcriptures, 
to give his errors a popular appearance, in the judgment 
of thofe who drink down error as water. 

Page 32, fpeaking of circumcifion, the token of the cov- 
enant of promife, and a feal of the righteoufnefs of Abra- 
ham's faith, which he had while in uncircumcifion, Mr. 
Worcefter in the ^rji place calls it the token, and then im- 
mediately adds, or feal of the covenant. Tokens or feaL 
This changes the matter fo httle as to be hardly perceived. 
In the next pag^ he tells us, that circumcifion was the tolun 
and feal of the covenant. Here he makes fome advance. 
Yet the difference between, a token or feal, and a token and 
feal, is fo fmall, that he might fuppofe his readers, generally, 
would not perceive it. 

After having changed the word of God, from token of 
the covenant, to token or feal of the covenant, and to token 
aad fealf then he drops the fcriptujre ejipreiTion and takes 



Two Difcourfes., Esfa J7 

fhe papiftical fubftitute, and calls circumcifion the outward 
jtal of the covenant, the appointed feal of the covenant ; and 
by thirty times repeating, in drilerent places, the feal, the- 
outivard feal, the appointed fcait of the covenant, he no doubt 
idippofed that his hearers and readers would take it for 
granted that he v^tas proceeding upon fcripture ground ;. 
whereas this is all a mere impofition upon the credulity 
and prepoffeiTion of the public. The word of God, in n» 
place, from Genefis to Revelation-, fays fo much as one. 
word ahout circumcifion, as being a feal of the covenant. 

The next thing which we may notice, is his changing 
promife into propofal. 

Says he, pages 34, 35, * God's promife, then, or propofal^ 
to Abraham, was to be a God, not only to him, but alfo 
to iiis feed after him. The fame was his promife, or pro- 
p'^falf to Ifaae-.— God promifed^ or propofed, to Abraham, to- 
be not only his God, but alfe the God of his feed ; fo he 
now promifesy or prcpofesj to every believing parent, to be 
not only a God to him, but alfo to his feed after him : and 
the {\i.mQpro7n2fey QY propofal i &c.* Five times in thefe twO' 
pages, he lo-wers down. t\\Q promife of God- to the level of a. 
propofal. 

We will nbv.' recur to fome more of hi$ mconfiftencies^ 
or attend ^a little farther to his continued inconfiftency, 
which runs through and is the fum of his Ihowey evidence^, 
and is at the foundation o^ his falfe reafonings, from begin- 
Fiing to end of his fubjecl. ., _ 

His other general- head is now to be confidered, which is, 

' II. • To coitfider more particularly what provifion was- 
made in the Ahrahamic coiienant, for the continuance of the 
church, formed by it, and the tranfmiffion of the bleffings. 
contained in it/ 

Here Mr. Worcefter mufl intend, by the Abrahamic 
covenant, either- — tirft, the covenant which was confirmed 
uf God in Chrift four hundred and thirty years before the- 
law ; or, fecondly, the covenant of circumcifion* If he 
intend the tirft, we have only to obferve, what we have 
fhown- before, that tjiis covenant never gave vifibility to 
the Jewifli church, for it was maniftfled and confirmed, and 
yet there was no vifjble church for years after: and be- 
sides, this covenant continues forever, though the Jevi'iih 
church is no more. If he intend the fecond,-the covenant 
of circumcifion, we have juft to obferve, that it hath fo. 
pafled away, that, fo far as ive keep it, and hope for falya- 
tiou Vy it, either for aurfehes 01 for our chiMreriy Chxiii{h.'^X^ 



38 Letters on Rev. S. Worcefier^s . 

profit us nothing, Gal. v. 2. Nor are we once told, in the 
fcriptures of truth, that any covenant is fubftituted in its 
room. 

Bat he intends the firft, and nothing is lefs to his pur- 
pofe : for he quotes, page 33, as proof of his propofition, 
what Peter faid to the Jews, Ads iii. 25, 26. *' Ye are the 
children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God 
made with our fathers, faying unto Abraham, And in thy 
feed Jhall all the kindreds of the earth he hlejfed. Unto you 
firft, God, having raifed up his Son Jefus, fent him to bleffe 
you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.*^* 
This quotation fully fhows what covenant he intends ; but 
what hath this to do with the formation of a vifible church 
in Abraham's family I Mr. Worcefter might with equal 
propriety have quoted the firft chapter of Genefis, or the 
laft of Revelation, and then hence told us, that the church 
in Abraham's family was founded by the one, or by the 
other, or by both ; and have concluded, that the Jewiih 
and Chriftian churches are one and tTie fame. 

Mr. Worcefter, under his fecond general head, has no 
formal argument, to prove tliat provifion was made in the 
Abrahamic covenant, tor the continuance of the church 
ibrmed by it, and the lianfmiffion of the bleffings con- 
tained in it. 

If I apprehend his idea with clearnefs, the fum of the 
provifion which was made in the Abrahamic covenant, for 
the continuance of the church formed by it, and the tranf- 
miffion of the bleffings contained in it, is, according to his 
notion of the matter, contained in his thirty-feventh and 
thirty-eighth pages, and in the following words : * For they 
which are the children of the ilefh (merely) are not the 
children of God^ but the children of the promifey the children 
in refpea to nvhotn there is that faith and fdelity which are 
the conditions of the promife, are counted for the feed. From 
this paflage (fays he) it is, on the one hand, plain, that the 
promife to be a God to Abraham, and to his feed after him, 
had refpe(5l primarily to his natural defcendants ; and, on 
the other hand, it is equally plain, that merely their being 
the natural defcendants of Abraham, did not bring them 
within xhe promife. To be children of the promife, they muft 
be children of faith ; children^ of <whom there is on the part of 
the parent or parents, the faith of Abraham in the covendfit 
of God.' 

From thefe premifes, and llie fame frequently mentioned 
in Mr. Worcefter's pages, he would have' us' concUide^ with 
him, that the following inferences are true : — Firft, That 



Two Difcourfes^ l^c. 33 

^verlafting falvatlon is promifed to children, on account of 
the faith of parent or parents. Secondly, That the children 
ihoukl be baptized on the faith of their parents. Thirdly, 
That all this is corroborative evidence, that the Jewifh and 
gofpel churches are one and the fame. 

1 have feveral objedions againft thefe premifes, and alfo 
againft the conclufions which Mr. Worcefter would draw 
from them. 

1. There is no fuch promife made, that the children 
fhail be faved by or on account of the faith of their parents : 
befides, God, by the prophet Ezekiel, (ch. xviii.) mani- 
feftly fpeaks againft the exlftence of any fuch promife. 

2. On fuppofition that fuch exifted in Abraham's day, 
and exifts ftill, yet no perfon ever kept the covenant which 
comprifes fuch a promife ; at leaft, we have no account of 
any fuch perfon. Even Abraham appears to have kept 
not more than one-eighth of fuch a covenant : for he had, 
at leaft, €ight fons, and but o«^ of them was a child of 
promife. ' 

3. Suppofe fuch a covenant exifts, and alfo fuppofe all 
godly parents obey this covenant, it does not heiice follow 
that th^ir children ihould be baptized, before they are 
manifeftly made partakers of the promife. 

' For the fake of ftiowing, and ftill farther expofing, the 
abfurdity of Mr. Worcefter's theory, I will ftate a principle, 
and ' then reafon from it upon /^/j/rmn/Zej-. 

All true Chrijiians hanxe the faith of Abraham in the co'venant 
tf God. 

! From this principle I reafon thus :r— All children oi parents 
.who have the faith oi Alraham in the covenant of God, will 
,be finally faved. All true Chriflians have this faith : there- 
fore, the children of all true Chrtjiians will hQ faved. Again, 
2i\l'^'ho Jhall be favedy ^re true Chriflians; therefore, the 
children* s clhldren of all true Chriftians, and that too, to the 
.latsfl generation^ ftiall h^ faved. Again, Abraham had faith 
in xhR covenant of God, and it was as operative in the 
father of the faithful as in any of his fons ; therefore, all 
the Iflimaelites, and all the Ifraehtes, and ail the infidel 
and gainfaying Jews, and all the defcendants of the fons of 
Keturah, are all' r*ved> or Mr. Worcefter's theory is abfurd 
or falle. 

Mr. Worcefter may reply, * To be the naturd children of 
Abraham, does not bring them within the promife.' Vety 
^ell. Then the matter ftands thus — To be the children 
of Abraham did not, in his day, bring them within the 
promife; but to be the children of ««^ Arj^Vwn^ ^^rfwi, now 



40 Letters on Rev, S. Worcejier^s 

idoes. Hence, one of thefe two things is true ; either, firft, 
that the promile is now different from what it was ia 
Abraham's time ; or, fecondly, Mr. Worcefter's theory is 
falfe. But if the promife -be diiferent now from vhat it 
was in Abraham's time, then his theory is falfe; for he 
goes, profefTedly, upon the fuppofition, that it is the fame ; 
;md if the promife be .the f rme now that it was in the time 
of Abraham, Mr. Worceder's theory is ftili fah'e ; for the 
rpromife then was not to Abraham and his feed according 
to the fleOi, but according to the eledion of grace. Rom., 
ix. 6 — 13. To make the bed of hi-s theory, and of The 
theory of his brethren, a perfon who has eight fons, as had 
Abraham* muft have eight times as much faith as Abraham 
had, or they will not be th« children o{ promife ; for but one 
of his was {o. I'hus abfurd and contradiiflory from fcrip- 
■ture, fadls, and common fenfe, is Mr. Wor<:efter's theory^ 
We have now pafled over and examined his firft Sermon, 
which contains his fubjeit ; and the following obfervations 
appear tb arife as natural deductions. 

♦ 1 . That Mr. Worcefter wholly mifunderftood his text, 
as mentioned at the clofe of Letter II. 

2. That his dodrine is not contained in his text, nc«* 
fupported by any of his arguments. 

3. That his whole feries of arguments is one continued 
fophijm^ of the firft magnitude. From argument to argu- 
ment, he proved what nobody denies, and then aflumed as 
proved what none feut Judaizing Chriftians do or ever did 
believe. 

4. That Mr. Worceftjer muft produce better arguments, 
or the eyes of the'underftanding part of his ow-n denomina- 
tion will probably difcover the weaknefs of their caufe. 
If he have brought as good arguments as there are, t« 

. prove that the gofpel church is but a continuation of th« 
old corrupt Jewifh church, his caufe is truly defperate, and 
the fooner forfaken the better, 

5. That he muft have taken the wrong fide of the fub- 
jeft, ©r a perfon of his good fenfe would not have laboured 
fo hard, and have proved nothing. 

What we have yet before us, is Mr. Worcefter's applica' 
t'totiy which is the moft oiFenfive part of his performance. 
But I hope to treat him with Chriftian mildnefs, whilft I 
fhall be under the difagreeable neceflity of rebuking him 
{harply, that he and others may fear, for the future, to 
come forward with temerity, againft the facred caufe of 
truth. 

In the mean time, I am, &c. 



Two Di/courfes^ life, -4-1 

We appeal to the Bible^ to ftuhhorn fa8s^ and to 
common fenfe. 



LETTER VIo 

"WEN, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 

VV E now come to what Mr. Worcefter calls 
Imprcvement ; in which he does as all, both good and bad. 
have done, fo far as the traditions and prejudices of mor- 
tals take the lead, wax worfe and worfe. Indeed, it is 
perfediy natural to expeift, that if a man fets out but a 
few degrees in a wrong diredion, he will, as he travels on, 
deviate and wander farther from the right way. Mr. 
Worcefter'^ having taken fuch a fet off, is the occafion of 
his inconinlencies and abfurditles, in v/hich we have feen 
him. The inconfiftencies, falfe ftatements, and mifrepre- 
fentations, in which we mitft yet view him, I charitably 
hope, originate from his erroneous fet off, rather than from 
any \viclj:ed defign, and fet purpofe to deceive and impofe 
on the public, and on the church of the Lord Jefus. 

In his improvement, his Jirjl article is, * We are led 
{fays he) to a grateful and devout contemplation of the 
great defign, the gradual progrefs, and the ultimate exten- 
fion and glory of the church of God, originally eftablifhed 
in the family of Abraham.' 

Tliis article might be fo explained as to have a good 
meaning ; but as Mr. Worcefter explains it, it hasthe fame 
erroneous fignification as has the preceding Sermon. His 
objedt ftill is, to prove that there is no neiv man, or body of 
meriy in the go/pel church, from what compofed the Jewifli 
-church ; and that the former, as well as the latter, is, of 
Tight, compofed of believers and unbelievers, in dired con- 
tradidion to the propliets, to Jefus Chrift, and to his apof- 
tles ; who fay, that the gofpel church ihoiild be, and is, 
made up of righteous ones, of fuch as are taught of God, and is 
an holy nation, &c. 

In this way alfo he excludes the myftery, which Paul 
fpeaks of, as having been hid in God from the foundation 
of the world, and which was not made known unto the fons 
•of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apoRles and 

D 



42 Letters on Rev, S, Wbrce/ler's 

prophets by the Spirit, that the Gentiles fhoiild be fellow 
heirs, and of the fame (new man or) body (with the be- 
lieving Jews) and partakers of his promtje in Chrijl by the 
gofpel. According to Mr. Worcefter, there appears to 
have been no myftery about the matter: nothing new took 
place, with relation to the church, when the God of heaven 
fat up his kingdom in the world, and called his people by 
another name ; at leaft, nothing new with refpedt to the ma- 
terials of which the church was compofed. 

If fome few Gentiles were added to it at the lirft, and 
more afterwards, this was nothing new. If in procefs of 
time more Gentiles than ever before, were added, ftill this 
-was nothing new or myfterious, any farther th«n it is 
inyfterious to have an old practice fomewhat more largely 
extended : for it had been culiomary in many, if not in all, 
generations of the Jewifh church, to receive Gentiles into it. 

His Jecond article, having no particular connexion with 
the point in debate, may be omitted : however, a n»te, 
pages 50, 5i» at the conclufion of his remarks on this arti- 
cle, may be nlticed. 

* Though the covenant (fays he) is never, on God's part, 
cftablifhed with any but true believers^ yet all who have taken 
the vows upon them, ought to feel themfelves facredly bound 
to fulfil their engagements. If they have opened their mouths 
unto the Lord^ they cannot go back.* 

All who have taken the voivs of God upon themfelves, 
ought, no doubt, to feel themfelves facredly bound to fulfil 
their engagement. But v,hat have the wicked and unbe- 
lieving to do, to take God's covenant into their mouths : 
yet, i'ays Mr. Worcefter, ' If they have opened their mouths 
unto the Lord^ they cannot go back.* 

By greatly mifapplying^and wrefting this general truth, 
That fuch as have opened their mouths unto the Lord, 
cannot go back, feveral minifters in the vicinity of Sedg- 
wick have been binding the confciences of their hearers, to 
continue pradfing the traditions of men, becaufe they have, in 
time paft, ignorantly covenanted to obferve them. Some 
of thefe minifters are greatly abufmg the forward belief 
and ignorance of many of their hearers. Thefe minifters 
are unable to (how their people, that the covenant into which 
they have entered, is in agreement with the command and 
pattern given ; yet they teach, th:-it to break this covenant^ 
though it be found neither in the Old Teftament nor in the 
Nenjo, is next to facrilege and perjury. '1 hus they bind 
their poor people with an heavy burden, of which God 



Two Difcourfesy l5fc\ 43 

-will, I truft, ere longp eafe them. Thofe who bound 
themfelves under an oath to kill Paul, might with as much 
propriety, have, been holden to perfeverance. — It may be 
the above rainifters are not the only ones, who ufe the above 
method, to retain their people in the Jhacklcs of paptjikal 
Jupsrjl'it'ton. 

His third article is, page 51, * It appears, that a cordial 
and obedient belief in all which God has propofed in his 
gracious covenant, is of high and everlafting importance.' 

Truly, whatever God hath propofed^ or promijedy in his 
gracious covenant, is of very high concernment to all to 
whom this matter appertains, and it fhould command their 
cordial and obedient belief. But how doth this fhow, that 
Chriftians have any particular and high connexion with the 
covenant of circumcifion, by which the vifible church in 
Abraham's family was inftituted ? Or, what hath this to 
do with the onenefs and famenefs of the gofpel and Jewiih 
churches ? Or, what hath this to do with the fprinkling of 
infants ? or with infant church memberfhip ? or with the 
certain falvation of Ilhmael and Efau, or of the fons of 
Keturah ? 

If we will hear Mr. Worcefter, he will (how us his opin- 
ion, page 52, * It is not, (fays he) indeed, fuppofed to be 
urtain, that if you be unbeUe'vmg and difobedient, your children 
will be finally loft ; for God may, as often in his fovereign 
mercy he does, go out of the limits of the church, and 
beftow his grace on thofe who are aliens from the common- 
wealth of Ifrael, and ftrangers from the covenant of prom- 
ife ; but if, in this cafe, he does beftow grace upon your 
children,_it will not be in purfuance of any covenant en- 
gagement to you.' 

Upon thefe obfervations we may make the following 
remarks : — 

1. Mr. Worcefter places unbelieving children within the 
limits of the gofpel church. 

2. He gives us to underftand, that it is probable, that 
the children of an unbelieving parent will be finally loft ; 
yet, he fays, It is not fuppofed to be certain that they 
will be. 

3. He informs us, that God ufually converts church mem- 
bers, or thofe within the limits of the church ; yet, he faya, 
* God may, as often in his fovereign mercy he does, go 
out of the limits of the church, and beftow his grace ' on 
others. 



44 Letters on Rev, S, Worcejler^s 

Mr., Worcefter Iiath a very different idea of gofpel church: 
members, from what the prophets, Ghrift Jefus, or the 
apoftles had : they confidered and fpake of them as being 
all holy. God never converts, or beftows regenerating, 
grace, upon any within the Imits of the gofpel church, fave 
it be when he converts an hypocrite, who hath joined the 
church, by profeiling to be holy when he was not. 

4. Mr. Wcrcefter inftrufts us to believe, that God be- 
ftows regenerating grace upon children, in purfuance of 
fome covenant engagement to their parents. How differ- 
ent this from the Bible ! Or,, at leaft, what hath the Bible 
to do with-fuch an idea ? Where or when did God ever 
enter into covenant with Abraham, Ifaac, or Jacob, or 
with any other perfon, to beflow faving grace upon their 
children, in confequence of any duty performed by parents ? 
If fuch a covenant exifts, or ever did exift, where is it re- 
corded ? If it can be found, which of the children doth it 
include ? the firft born ? or the laft ? or doth it include all ? 

Have w^e any information that fuch a covenant was ever 
ol/erved by mein, or fulfilled by the Lord .^ If fo, where ? ra 
what verfe, chapter, or book, of either the Old Teftament 
or the Kew ? Thef^(fl'is> the whole n~.atter appears- to be a 
mere Jewifh or papiftical error and fuperftition, into which 
Mr. Worcefter and his brethren appear to have been hd, 
a.s a thing neceffary to be believed, to give mere plaufible- 
fupport to the traditionary notion of infant baptifm. 

It is-.true, the Lord promiled Abraham to be a God to-, 
him and his feed after him. It is alfo true, that the Lord 
ikidj ," I know, him, that he will command Ms^ildren and 
his houfehold after- him, and thsy Jhall heep the v/ay of the 
Lord, to do juftice and judgment, that the hord may bring 
upon Ab'rahnm that ivhich he hath fpohen of him.'* But here 
is no promife, that upon Abraham's being obedient and 
faithful, his children afier the flefh fhould be fpiriuialj or 
regenerate; nor have we information that any of them 
were fo, fave Ifaac, v^'ho was the child of prcnufa. 

The whole w^hich Mr. Worceller and others have faid of 
this matter, appears to be a mere prejudice, invented prob- 
ably in the firft place to give currency to the traditionary 
rite of infant baptifm., and infant fprinkling ; and it is man- 
ifedly ftiil continued, to fupport the fame error. 

But, fays Mr, Worcester, ''fourthly^ from our fubjed: we 
may. infer, that for believing parents to give their children 
to God in baptifm, is a gre-it and irsportant duty.* 



Tvjo Difcourfes^ iffc. 45 

From what part of his fubjedl does he infer this ? He 
hath no where fhown us, that God hath, in any part of his 
word, enjoined this, by ftatute, law, or precept, as a duty, 
upon any of his friends. But we will hear what lie hath 
to fay, in fupport of this inference ; for we are willing he 
fhould demonflrate it, if he can. 

* When God (fays Mr. Worcefter) eftabliflied his cove- 
nant with Abraham, he gave him the fign of circumcifion, 
a feal of the righteoufnefs of faith ; and in the felf-fame 
day was Abraham circumcifed and Iftimael his fon, and 
all the men of his houfe, born in the houfe, and bought 
. with money of the ftranger, were circumcifed with him.* 
Page 53, he fays, * Circumcifion has been difcontinued, and 
baptifm appointed in its place. But no order, no intima- 
tion, has been given, that the feal in its prefent form is not, 
as it was exprefsly required in its ancient form, to be applied 
to the children of the church.* 

A few natural confequences from what he here afferts, 
will fufficiently fhow its abfurdity. 

1. A Carolina planter to-day purchafes a fhip-load of 
Africans, who are worfhippers of devils ; to-morrow, their 
matter is converted. Now he and his heathen flaves muft 
be all baptized ; for, fays Mr. Worcefter, Baptifm hath 
been appointed in the place of circumcifion, and all the 
males bought with money were to be circumcifed. 

2. All thefe heathen flaves belong to the Chriftian 
church ; for thus it was in the church formed in Abra- 
ham's family, if any vifible church fubfifted there. 

3. The children of all thefe worlhippers of devils, muft 
be baptized : for, fays Mr. Worcefter, * no order 3 no intima- 
tion, has been given, that the feal in its prefent form is not, 
as it was exprefsly required in its ancient form, to be ap- 
pl^d to the children of the church.* 

4. Mr. Worcefter has now, according to his antichrif. 
tian fcheme, hundreds of h^^xh^m feakdifialed in the churchy 
fealed in the covenant of grace : for * circumcifion (he tells 

us) is the outward, the uppointedy feal of the covenant, and 
baptifm is appointed in its place.' 

How much like the man of fin does Mr. Worceftei* 
appear, whilft he is urging upon the Chriftian world, of 
church, principles inevitably conneded with fuch confe- 
quences ! When the leaders of God's people will not abide 
by his word, but take liberty to alter, change, and mangle 
it at their pleafure, they make ftrange work, and piunge 
themfelves and their followers into many hurtful errors. 
D 2 



40 Letters on Rev, S* Worcejler^s- 

One great occafion of Mr. Worcefter's abforditiesj into 
•which he hath run, and falfe ftatements which we have ■ 
already feen, and of more which we fhall foon fee, is his 
unufual boldnefs in UTefting the fcriptures, and . aflerting 
things which he. knew not. Perhaps no one thing hath 
had greater influence in darkening his mind, and blinding 
him from the truth, than his remarkable- miftake, in aflert-- 
ing, more than thirty times ^ that circumcifton and baptijm are 
the feal of the covenant of grace. When any perfon ac- 
quires a habit of faying what is not true, it is not ftrange,,, 
ihould he believe himfelf.when.no other perfon fhould. 
This is, no doubt J the cafe with Mr. Worcefter. Speaking;- 
of.circumcifion.and. baptifm, he tells, us,^ page 53, * The 
feal has, indeed, been altered/ 

Reply. It is not fully believed by the writer, that Mn 
Worcefter intentionally fpake falfeiy ; at the fame time^ 
there is not a v/ord of truth in what he fays, about circum- 
cifion and baptifm being a feal of the covenant, and of the 
Jeal of the eovenant being altered. 'J here is not a fmgle word 
of this in the fcriptures of truth. Would the public be 
perfuaded to fearch the fcriptures, as the more noble Bere- 
ans did, they would find that infant fprinkling is all a mere 
deiufion or invention .of men, like this feal of the covenant, 
with which Mr. Worcefter makes fuch a Ihow of argumente 

In pages ,5 3, 54, he fays, * Circumcifton was formerly 
the appointed pre-requiftte of admiftion into the church of 
God ; baptifm is now the appointed pre=requiftte of admif- 
fion into the fame church. In a word, (fays he) baptifm 
i& of the fame import, and of the fame ule in the church, 
under the prefent difpenfation, as was circuracifion under- 
the ancient.' 

Here is trutli and error mixed together, as. they are in 
all his pages. It is true, that circumcifton was formerly 
and always the appointed pre-requiftte of admiffion into the 
Jewiih church, or it was the initiating ordinance. It is 
alfo true, that baptifm is now:, and ever was, from the be- 
ginniiag of the gofpel church, the appointed pre-requiftte of 
admiffion into it, or it is ever the viftble admiflion itfelf, 
notwith landing, the great miftakes of Mr. Auftin a^d 
.others, as to this matter. . But it is not true, that circur/i- 
cifton and baptifm are, -as. Mn Worcefter fays they are, 
pre-requifites of adnr.iSion into the-v fame church-j for iu 
A<5ts iii. we are informed, that the very perfons who were 
circupicifed and admitted to the Jewiftixhujcb,. were after- 
wards baptized and. added to the gofpel church^ . It would 



Two DifcGurfes^ ^c, 47 

"ble an abfurdity to fay, that a perfon was added to a fociet}', 
of which he was at the time, and had long been, a confiant 
member ; but, as abfurd as it is, this is -Mr. Worcefter's 
notion of the bufmefs. His theory is, that the: converted 
Jews were, by baptifm, added to the church, of which they 
had been me-mbers from their infancy. 

Befides, it is not true, as he alfertSf * that baptifm is of 
the fame import in the church under the prefent difpenfa- 
tion, as was circumciilcn under the ancient.' For circum- 
cifion, when adminiitered, according to the command, at 
eight days old, only imported, that the fubjeft was a child^■ 
of Abraham, after the fleib, or a child of a converted or 
profelyted heathen ; vichereas biiptifra, ,when adminiftered 
accoiding to the command and pattern given, imports^ that-- 
the fubjefts of it are the children jcf God by faith in Chrift 
Jefus. Thus- we fee, that his. theory leads him farther and ? 
faither into error ai>d~miftake. 

Again, fays Mr. Worcefter, * The whole analogy of 
fcripture goes to fupport this fentiment, that baptifm has,. 
in fad, taken the place of circumcifion ;' and then, to ef^ 
tabliih his fentiment, deduces a pallage of fcripture which 
fays nothing to the point, but only mentions the circum=?- 
cilion of Chiiftj which was m-a.de av'ithout hands. If this 
eleventh verfe of the fecond chapter of Colofllans, have any 
reference to <wafer baptifm^ it is all gathered from the twelfth 
verfe, v,-hich fpeaks of being buried a^d raifed again in bap^ 
tifm. Should we allow Mr. Woreefter to be correal:, in his 
application of the eleventh verfe, to prove that baptifm 
hath taken the place of circumcifion, then it would prove 
the ruin of two of his ill- fupported opinionsj with which he 
hath, of late yearsj beeaafnufing the public. One is, his 
traditionary notion oi fprlnkjlng for baptifm ;. for the text 
has no intimation of j^ri^ji/Zw^ for baptifm, but of being 
hnried 2iX\d raifed again,. The other is, his opinion, that this 
text in Colofllans, and the parallel one in the fixth chapter 
of Romans, intend fpiritual baptifm j which they cannot, 
provided the natural import of the text is,, that Chriftian 
baptifm hath taken tlie place of Jewilh circumcifion. In 
this way Mr. Woreefter might make progrefs in deftroying 
his errors ; ruin two old ones by the introduction of a new- 
one. So inconfiftent is error, that fuch as abide in it, caii- 
not make ftraight paths for their feet. 

In the fame page, he tells us about an exprefs precept 
for adminiftering the covenant to the infant feed of the 
church, and that tlie fame precept ftill remains in force, 



48 Letters on Rev. S. V/orceJier* s 

unlefs exprefsly repealed. His words are, * There was, 
under the former difpenfation, an exprefs precept for admin- 
iftering the covenant to the infant feed of the church. That 
precept, varying only as the feal is varied, ftill remains in 
force, unlefs it have been exprefsly repealed.' Here is the 
appearance of fomething new. Under the former difpen- 
fation, we are told, there was an exprefs precept for admiri' 
ifterlng the covenant to the infant feed of the church ; and 
unlefs this precept have been exprefsly repealed, it ftill 
remains in force. Here, if Mr. Worcefter have the truth, 
we, v/ho are CKriftian adminiftrators, muft adminifter the 
covenant to the infant feed of the Chriftian church. What 
CQvenajit ? The covenant of baptifm ? No, for there is no 
fuch covenant mentioned. The covenant of circumcifion i 
No ; for if we be circumcifed Chrift fhall profit us nothing. 
What covenant then ? The covenant of grace, or the new 
covenant ? No, for to adminifter that is God's prerogative. 
But we may be more inquifitive than Mr. Worcefter will 
allow ; for he tells us, (after he had taken every thing for 
granted, which it was neceffary for him to prove) that it is 
arrogance for us to demand any explicit precept, in the New 
Teftament, for our pradice in relation to infants, under the 
new difpenfation. His words are, * It is arrogance^ there- 
fore, to demand, for we have no right to expe<5t, an explicit 
•renewal of this precept to be found in the New Teftament, 
^uy more than of the precept for the obfervance of the 
iabbath,' This is a fhort way of doing bufmefs, to tell us 
to believe without evidence, and pradife without precept 
or example ; and, if we hefitate, call us arrogant* 

Mr. Worcefter's note, pages ^^^ ^6^ muft now have a 
moment's attention, that the public may fee the fallacy, 
deception, or imprudence of the man, when he manages 
his opponents^ arguments. If he will confefs his ignorance 
of the Baptifts' lentiments, then what he hath afTerted may 
be palTed over ; but otberwife, his management is higlily 
cenfurable. But we will hear a comprefted view of this 
note, and two former ones, as put together by himfelf. 
His words are, 

* The very palpable inconfiRencies, noticed in thrs anc! 
two former notes, it may not be improper to exhibit to- 
gether in one point of view. 

' I. The covenant made with Abraham and his feed, 
x^as only a temporal covenant, and formed only a temporal 
church ; yet the great promife of the covenant had refped, 
not to natural, but only to fpiritual feed I 



Two Dlfcourfes^ '&'c, 49.' 

*'2. Though the great prom Ife of the covenant had re- 
{ped, not to natural, but only to ipiritual feed, yet the 
covenant was long ago abolifhed. Since the coming of: 
MeiTiah, God is no longer., by covenant, the Godof Abra-. 
ham and his (Jj>infua/).{eed ! 

* 3. Though the great promife of the covenant- had^ 
no refpe<fl to natural feed, yet the natural feed were not 
only admitted to the feal of the covenant,, but even, as 
members, to all the privileges of the church ! 

' 4. Though the Abrahamic church was a. type of th^ 
Ghriftian church, and in that church children were admit- 
ted to the feal of the covenant, and to all the privileges of 
members ;^ yet in the gofpel church, they are neither: to be 
recognized as members, nor. even regarded as fit fubjedls 
for the feal of the covenant! 

* Such (fays he) are a few of the abfurdities cf the Anti- 
pjedobaptift fclieme.' 

If Mr. Worcefter knew no better, he is not to be envied'; 
if he knew better, and yet hath given this fophiftical view 
of his opponents' fentiments, he is to be difefteemed. 

We will now fupply, in the above particulars, what Mr. 
Worcefter ought not to have omitted. Afterwards thje 
public will judge, whi^ther abfurdities attach, to the Eap- 
tills, or darknefs and miil-eprefentation to Mr. Worcefter. 
It ought, however, to be previoufly cbfervedj-that the Bap- 
tifts never advanced the abfurdities which he. fets to their 
account : be manufactured them to. his liking, and then 
charged them upon his opponents. It may alfo be ob- 
ferved, that the Baptifts dillike his antircripturaly?<2/, which, 
he fees fit to affix to the covenant. 

The above particulars, fomewliat redified, are, 

1. The covenant of c'lrcumajicn. made with Abraham and 
his feed, wasonly a temporal covenant, and formed only a 
temporal church; yet the great promife of the covenant of 
grace had refped, net to natural^ but only to J]>iriiual feed.-! 

2. Though the great promJfe of the covenant of grace 
had refpeCl, not to natural, but only to fpiritual hed, yeti 
the covenant, of circumcifion. v/as long ago abolifhed; 
Since the coming of Meffiah; God is no longer, by the 
covenant of circumcifion, the. God, cf Abraham and his-, 
(fpiritual or) natural feed ! 

3. Though the great promife of the covenant o-f grace 
had no refpeift to the natural feed, yet the natural feed were 
not only a-dmitted to circumcirion., the.feal (he iliould.haye. 



50 Letters on Rev, S, Worcejiers 

faid token) of the covenant of grace, but even, as mem- 
bers, to all the privileges of the Jewilh church ! 

4. Though the Abrahamic church was a type of the 
Chriflian church, and in that church children were admitted 
to circumcifion, the feal (the token) of the covenant of 
grace, and to all the privileges of members ; yet, in the 
gofpel church, they are neither to be recognized as mem- 
bers, nor even regarded as lit fubjedls for baptifm, the feal, 
token, or outivard profejfwn of internal right eoujnefs^ and of 
thi'ir being partakers of the covenant oj grace I 

At the clofe of each of thefe fuppofed Antipasdobaptift 
abfurdities, he adds a note of exclamation, or admiration ; 
and, indeed, it is a little to be admired, that he ffiould, in 
four inftances at once, pervert the true fentiments of the 
Baptifts, and of his own free choice, turn them into abfurd- 
ities ; and, after he had finifhW the matter, wonder at it 
himfelf, and by his notes of admiration, fet the world at 
wondering. 

The public will determine whether there be any abfurdi- 
ty in the above particulars, fave what Mr. Worcefter has 
©ccafioned by his unfcriptural feal, and by mifreprefenting 
the fentiments of the Baptifts. 

In pages 57, 58, he has another note, "which is nearly 
as full of error and palpable miireprefentations as the pre- 
ceding. But the writer is tired in correding a man, whofe 
errors are as numerous as his lines. However, we muft 
attend him farther, for fome of his moft reprehenfible 
management is yet before us. 

With fixed intention to defend truth, and to detedt error, 

I am, &c. 



We appeal to the Bihle^ to Jluhborn fads^ and to 
common fenfe. 



LETTER VII. 

MEN, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 
V 

( % OUR attention would not be fo long arreft- 

ed, by remr^rks oii Mr. Worcefter's miftakes, had he not 



Two Difcourfes, ^c. 51 

have l:iboured fo hard to deceive you, and employed fuch 
unwarrantable means to accomplifh it. But brevity is not 
greatly to be confulted, when truth is either to be vindi- 
cated and wrefted from the devourer, or firft principles of 
the vifible church of Chrift to be given up. 

Perhaps no Proteftant ever made a bolder attack on 
truth, than Mr. Worcefter has done, or expofed himfelf 
more in the attempt. Says he, page 59, * For more than 
three thoufand years, the fcal of the covenant was univer- 
/ally applied to the children of the churchy no one forbidding 
it. — It was thus for the fpace of twelve or fifteen hundred 
years after the introdudion of the Chriftian difpenfation.' 

Now, there is not fo much as a Ihadow^ of truth in all 
this ; it is at beft one of Mr. Worcefter' s bare-faced m.if- 
takes. I will not accufe Mr. Worcefter of lying to fapport 
a fmking caufe, but this I wnll fay, he is either extremely 
ignorant of the controverfy in which he writes, or he iviU 
lingly makes miftakes. A volume of teftimonies, in direct 
contradidlion to what he afferts, might be cafily produced. 
Take the following as a fample. 

The Rev. Mr. Fuller informs us,* that Chriftianity had 
a confiderable footing in England, not far from the year 
67,, in the reign of Arviragus. From the year 63 to the 
year 469, Chriftianity prevailed greatly in England ; and 
multitudes of martyrs of Jefus were flain there, during the 
Roman heathen pjsrfecutions, particularly in that under 
Dioclefian and Maximian his colleague.-t- 

In the year 469, the Saxons invaded England, and foon 
made a complete conqueft, fo as to drive all the Chriftians 
into Cambria, which is now called Wales. Here, for up- 
wards of an hundred years, the oppreffed und perfecuted 
remains of the Britifh church, had a place of fome reft ; 
till St. or rather Sinful Auftin, in the year 596, came into 
England, with about forty of his papiftical afTociates.J 
He met with great fuccefs in converting the heathen Saxons 
to the fuperftitions of popery. After he had accomplifhed 
this bufmefs, his next was to convert the old Britifh church 
(which had fled into the woods and mountains of Wales) 
from the order and difcipline which they had received from 
the apoftles or primitive miffionaries, and kept pure till 
that time.$ 

* Eng. Bap. Hift. p. 456, + Rapin's Hift. Eng. Vol I. p. 18. 
\ Fox's Mart. p. 149. 
§ Fox's Mart. D. 153. ^Fuller's CKarch Hiflory, p. 61. 



3":2 luetters on Rev, S. Worcejlefs 

All which I need here fhow, to eftabllfh my point, is, 
that the remains of the primitive Britifh church were An- 
tipsedobaptifts, or that they did not, and would not, baptize 
their children ; which is perfectly evident, from the accomr- 
^lodating propofais which Auftin made to them. His 
propofals were, " That they fhould embrace the ceremonies 
of the church of Rome, particularly, in the time of keeping 
Eafter, and in lapiiziing their children,^' He laboured to 
bring them to thefe fuperflitions of the mother of harlotSy 
and threatened them with deftruflion, if they would not 
comply. Thefe noble Britons determined to abide in the 
doctrines and ordinances of Jefus Chriftj and would not 
iubmit to the traditions of men. 

The confequence of their fidelity to theJr Lord, w^as 
fierce perfecution and great deftruction, with which Auflin 
threatened them ; and which, upon their refufal, it is fup- 
pofed he procured to be brought upon them by Etheifride, 
king of Northumberland, who ilew eleven or twelve hun- 
dred of them in one day, at one place.* Here it is certain, 
that the perfecuted Britifh church, about the year 600, w'ere 
Antipaedobaptifts ; and it is equally certain, by fair deduc- 
tion, that their anceftors were fo, from the firli planting of 
Chriftianity in England. 

This is one impregnable contradidion to Mr. Worcefter's 
too bold affertion : for thefe truly Chriftian Britons not 
only did not praclife infant baptifm, but chofe death rather 
than to defile the church of Chrift with this popiih fuper- 
ilition. 

Salmafms and Suiferus, as quoted by Mr. Booth, Vol. 
II. page 76, informs us, that in the two firft centuries, no 
one was baptized, except, being inftrudled in the faith, and 
acquainted with the dodrine of Chrift, he was able to pro- 
fefs himfelf a believer .; becaufe of thofe words, " He that 
believeth, and u baptized J* Firft, therefore, lie w^as a be- 
liever. Thence the order of catechumens in the church. 
Then alfo, it was the conftant cuftom to give the Lord's 
fupper to thofe catechumens immediately after their bap- 
tifm. f 

Thefe two witnefTes xeftify, that Mr. Worcefter has not 
given us the truth. 

* Kift. Eng. Bapt. pref. p. 22, 23, 24. 

t Epift. ad Juftum Patium, apud Van Dale Hift. Baptifm. Sui url 
Thcfau. Ecclef. fub. vou Suraxis. Tom, ii. p. 1136, 



Two Difcourfisy ^c, 53 

Johanus Bohemius, as mentioned by Mr. Andrews, fays, 
** It was, in time paft, the cuftom to adminifter baptifm to 
them that were inftru<a:ed in the fafth ; but afterwards, 
when it wa^ thought and adjudged needful to eternal life, 
to be baptized, it was ordained that new-born children 
fhould be baptized, and godfathers were appointed, who 
fliould make confeffion and renounce the devil on their 
behalf.* 

The Petrobruiians were condemned, in the Lateran coun- 
cil, under Pope Innocent II. in the year ii39,«for rejeding 
infant baptifm. f 

If no one forbade the baptifm of new-born infants, how 
came it to pafs that Auguftine, in the fourth century, 
warned his hearers and readers to beware of the BaptiRs, 
and of the Antipacdobaptifts of his day ; and when writing 
of infant baptiftn, to fay, " Let none Jo much as ivhifper any 
ether dodlrine in your ears P" And how is it that the council 
at Carthage, in the fifth century, fhould fay, " It is our 
pleafure, that whofoever denieth that new-bom infants are 
to be baptized — let him be accurfed?" Befides, if no one 
forbade infant lapiifm, for tivelve or fifteen hundred years after 
the commencement of the Chrijiian difpenfatlony how is it that 
Mr. Worcefter brings forward Walafrid Strabo, of the 
ninth century^ as reprefenting that infant baptifm took its 
origin in the time of Auftin ? (as it manifeftly did in En- 
gland!) How is this matter ? How can it be reconciled, 
that fo many fpake, and fpake bitterly, againft thofe who 
rejeded infant baptifm, in thofe early times, if not one, in 
thofe times, ever forbade or fpake againft that fuperftitious 
practice ? This is enough to evince that Mr. Worcefter's 
pen is incorre^. 

In pages 59, 60, Mr. Worcefter has the following notice- 
able expreffions : * If during the laft three hundred years, 
there have been fome, in the different parts of Chriftendom, 
who have forbidden little children to be brouglit to Chrift, 
and denied the application of the feal of the covenant to 
them ; yet, thanks be to God, in refpecS to this interefting 
matter, the great body of the church has ftill adhered to the 
divine inftitute, and to the uniform practice of the faithful in 
all former ages,^ 

In this quotation, we find one falfe infinuation and one 
groundlefs aflertion, provided the church of Chrift, and not 

* Andrcw«*» Vindic. p.- io<5. \ XH Rcbat Ecdef. c. a6. 



54 Letters on Rev. S. Worcejier^s 

the church of Antichrid, be inteaded, as having adhered to 
the inftltute of infant baptifm ; divine injlitute {traditionary 
or Juperjiitious injlitute, he fliould have faid.) 

His falfe infmuation is, that the Baptifts have forbidden 
little children to be brought to Chrift. There is no truth 
in this. He has not produced, and it is believed he cannot 
produce, fo much as a fingle inftance, in which a Baptift 
hath forbidden little children either to be brought to Chrift 
or to come to him. Does he fuppofe, that to bring little 
children to h^ptlfm, is bringing them to Chrift ? It is true, 
the Papifts may have fome fuch abfurd notion; but the 
Bible has never told us, that this was bringing them to 
Chrift ; nor hath Chrift, nor his difciples, nor his apoftles, 
ever once mentioned fuch a pradlce. Not a word, from 
Genefis to Revelation, is faid, about infant baptifm, much 
lefs of its being a dimne infiiiute, or of this being the way to 
bring little children to Chrift. 

His groundlefs aflertion is this : * The great body of the 
church has ftill adhered to the divine inftltute (infant bap- 
tifm) and to the uniform pradice of the faithful in ajl 
former ages.' 

In this groundlefs affertlon, there are two very great 
miftakes. The firft is, that the great body of the church, 
meaning the church of Chrift, adheres to infant baptifm. 
The other is, that the faithful, in all former ages, have 
adhered to this pradice. jl 

Two definitions appear to be both lawful and expedient, 
in this place. 

One is, The vifible church, of ChriJ}, is compofed of all thofi 
righteous ones, who have been baptized upon a profejjion of their 
faith in Chrijl, 

The other is, The vijtble church of Antichrijly is compofed of 
all thofe, ivho have been baptized, or fprinUed, in manifeji un- 

Thefe plain definitions may caufe fome hard judgments 
to be pronounced againft me, by defigning and by errone- 
ous men ; but with me, it is a fmall thing to be judged of 
man's judgment. 

We will now take notice of Mr. Worcefter's groundlefs 
affertlon. He fays, * The great body of the church adheres 
to infant baptifm.' Had he faid. The great body of the 
church of Antichrift adheres to it, no body could, with 
truth, contradid him. For, Infant baptifm hath been one 
of the main pillars of Antichrift, from the beginning ; and 
fome of the feeds of this appear to have been fowing, by 



Tvjo Difcourfes^ Isft, 55 

the Judaizlng teachers, among the churches of Galatia, 
even in Paul's day. But nothing is farther from the truth, 
than this fentiment, that the great body of the church of 
Chrift hath adhered to infant baptifm. Inftead of this, 
not fo much as any fmgle branch of this church, in any 
place or age of the world, hath ever adhered to it. Infant 
baptifm is peculiar to Antichrift's kingdom ; and it is ex- 
pedient, that fuch as fear God, and are not, through preju- 
dice, both blind and deaf to truth, fliould have here ex- 
plained to them, what hath, perhaps more than any other 
thing, darkened the minds of many good men, in this 
inatter. It is this, — Thofe who have \yritten the hiftory of 
the church, have given us the hiftory of Antichrift's church, 
rather than that of Chrift's. Whenever they have given us 
any hints of Chrift's church, they have taken their docu- 
ments, or information, from the polluted pens of Anti- 
chrift's friends, who have, uniformly, reprefented Chrift's ' 
church as fome deformed fedl of heretics. Mr. Worcefter 
appears to h^ve derived his information from the fame 
fource, and to have pofTefied too much of the fame judg- 
ment. 

Mr. Worcefter is not fo blamable for not pofTeffing the ' 
hiftory of the church of Chrift, as he is for not knowing 
her, \^hen he fees her. P'or the church of Chrift hath been 
hidden, in the place which God appointed for her, for 
twelve hundred and fixty years ; and it is not many years, 
or at moft, not many ages, fmce ftie left her wildernefs 
ftation, and hath been fhowing herfelf in the world ; and 
her hiftory hath not yet been written, or not ccllecled into *• 
regular form. But Mr. Worcefter, and his brethren top, ' 
are very much to be blamed, that they do not know the 
vifible church of Chrift, wherever fhe difcovers herfelf; 
foi though her hiftory be not written, yet a defcription of 
her is given, and that plainly too, by Mofes and the proph- 
ets, by Chrift and the apoftles. See Deut. xviii. 15, 19, 
Pfa. xxii. 22. Ifa. viii. i8. liv. 13. Jer. xxxi. 31 — 34, 
John vi. 45. Ads iii. 22, ult. Rom. i 6, 7. i Cor. i. 2. 
2 Cor. i. 1. Eph, i. i Thef. i. i — 4. Heb. ii. 11, 12, 13. 
viii. 8 — II. 1 Pet. ii. 9. In thefe texts, and in many 
others, is the Chriftian church defignated, and plainly too ; 
hence it is a fm of ignorance, not to know her. But it 
may be a fm of another kind to oppofe her, as he and many 

ihis brethren have dared very boldly to do. 

If many of thofe, who oppofe the gofpel church, be, as 
we hope they are, the people of God, fpiritually, they ought 



56 Letters on Rev. S. Worce/ier*s 

to hear his word, Rev. xviii. 4. " Come out of her, my 
people, that ye be not partakers of her (Antichrift's) fins, 
and that ye receive not of her plagues." Becaufe that 
many good people are found within the limits of Antichrift, 
this is no argument that Antichrift and Chrift are one : 
but this is exa<5lly what was lo be, juft before the deJruBlon 
of fpiritual Babylon, or the church of Antichrift ; fome of 
God's people were to he in her, and now the command is, 
that they come out. 

His other groundlefs affertion, * That the faithful, in all 
former ages, have adhered to the pradlice of infant baptifm,' 
is refuted by what has been juft now faid. If more be 
thought needful, it will be found in what is foon to be faid 
upon Mr. Worcefter's note, which is now to come under 
confideration. 

The public are earneftly defired to grant me a careful 
attention, for I am endeavouring to plead the caufe of 
Chrift's rifing church, againft the laft ftruggles of Anti- 
chrift. 

In the note, pages 60, 61, 62, the fpirit of Antichrift 
appears to have done its utmoft, in fpreading, perhaps, the 
laft blind over the minds of God's people, in our land of 
free inquiry. A greater ftretch of mifreprefentation and 
groundlefs aflertion, perhaps never efcaped the pen of man, 
than Mr. Worcefter hath given, in the long note to which 
v/e fhall foon attend. The principal part of this note will 
be inferted, by paragraphs and fentences, that the public 
may have a full view of Mr. Worcefter's fuppofed ftrength, 
and may the more fully difcover his weaknefs, deception, 
falfehood, and abfurdity, Thefe are hard accufations ; 
but if they be literally and abundantly juft, as applied to 
Mr. Worcefter's writings, and if he have made ufe of fuch 
kind of management, in oppofition to the church of Chrift 
Jefus. and to pre^^nt her friends frcm beholding and em- 
bracing her, ought he not to be expofed, and truth vindi- 
cated, though it bring upon his writings juft contempt and 
infamy ? 

This note begins thus : — * As there was no dlfpute about 
baptifm, in the firft ages of Chriftianity, it fhould not be 
expefled, that much would be found particularly on the 
fubjed, in the writings of thofe ages' 

j4nfiver. There is much found on the fubjedi of baptifm, 
in the writings of the firft ages of Chriftianity ; but not a 
word for infard baptifm, in the two firft centuries, as is 
ihown at large by Dr. QI■^^i^, in his Refle^l:ions. 



Two Difcourfesy ^c. £j 

* But (foys Mr. Worcefter) becaufe there is nothing 
diredly on the fubjec^, either for or againft infant baptifm, 
in the fragments whlch^have come down to us, of th^ writ- 
ings of the firft century, the Antipaedobaptifts, with an 
aflurance peculiar to themfelves, have undertaken to affert, 
not to prove, that during the firft century, infant baptifm 
was not pra(5tifed in the church. With equal propriety we 
might affert, even had we no proof to fupport our affertion, 
that it was pradifed univerfally : but we are not reduced 
to this extremity. The facred truth is, there is as much 
evidence, as, from the ftate of the cafe, could reafonably be 
expedled, that during the firft century, and for feveral fuc- 
ceeding ages, infant baptifm was pra<5tifed in the church, 
univerfally, and without contradidion or queftion.' 

Anf'wer. In the writings of the firft century, we have 
the beft evidence which the circumftances of the cafe ad- 
mit, that infant baptifm was then unknown. It was not 
fpoken againft explicitly, to be fure, and for this plain 
reafon-~the fcheme of infant baptifm was not then invented; 
But what is faid by Barnabas, in his Epiftle to the Corin- 
thians, and by Hermas, in his Vifions, prove this — that 
infants were neceffarily excluded. The fiift fpeaks of the 
perfons who w^ere baptized, as Iroing upon the belief of thef 
promifts and of the word. The other fpeaks of the baptised, 
as having been taught in the word. In (hort, they both 
give us an account of believers' baptifm, and of that only.* 
This is altogether inconfiftent with xhQ fuppojition, that they 
praBifed infcmt unbelievers^ baptifm. Yes, it is wholly incon- 
fiftent with the idea, that when heathen parents or matters 
were converted, their unconverted children and fervants 
were admitted to baptifm. 

Thefe fathers faid all which their circumftances permit- 
ted, to put infant baptifm out of countenance in our day.. 
It is abfurd to require that they fhould have faid more, and 
equally abfurd to infer, as Mr. Worcefter does, that be- 
canfe they did not fay more than their circumftances per- 
itittted, they implicitly favoured it. 

* But (fays Mr. Worcefter) the Antipaedobaptifts, with 
an afTurance peculiar to themfelves, have undertaken to; 
affert, not to prove, that during the firft century, infant 
baptifm was riot pradifed in the church.' 

** Gale's ReSecStions, Let. II. • 

£ 2 



3 ^ Letters on Rev, S. Warcejler^s 

Reply, We have appealed to the Bible, to uubboni fads 
and to common fenfe. If all or any of thefe may be ad- 
mitted as witnefs, and their evidence taken as proof, then 
we have undertaken to proves and not merely to ajferty that 
infant baptifm was not pradifed during the firft century of 
the church. The Bible is not only filent as to the praftice 
cf infant baptifm, but enjoins pre-requifites to baptifm, 
Tvhich are incompatible with the capacity of infants. One 
Bible pre-requilite, and it is, in the prefent cafe, equally 
conclufive with a thoufand, is this — the fubjedts of baptifm 
mud be Jirft taught, and fo taught as to be vifible believers. 
Matt, xxviii. Mark xvi. This is the Bible teftimony, as to 
the firft century, and indeed, for every other, as to. infant 
baptifm and the pradice of it. 

Stubborn facts fay, that the fathers, the bifhops and elders 
of the church, in the firii: century, pradifed as the Bible 
enjoins, and bapcized thofe who were previoufly taught 
and brought to believe ; and we have not one line of the 
contrary pradice, that is, of unbelievers' baptifm, the firft 
error of Antichrift.* 

Common ^ew^e teftifies, that if the fathers of the firft 
century baptized, as they tell us they did, upon a profeflion 
of fai:h by the candidates, and fay not a word of baptizing 
any without fuch a profefiion, then Mr. Worcefter has na 
claim upon our belief, when he, without a fhadow of evi- 
dence, tells us, that * ihefacred truth is, there is as much 
evidence, as, from the ftate of the cafe, could reafonably be 
expeded, that during the firft century, and for feveral fuc- 
ceeding ages, infant baptifm was pradifed in the church* 
univerfally, and without contradidion or queftion.' 

We ftiali now exarhine his argument, or rather what he 
hath told us, and meant we fhould take upon his mere 
teftimony. 

* In the writings of Clemens Romanus and Hermes Paf- 
tor, both cotemporaries with the apoftles, (fays he) paflages 
are extant, which, by fair implication, prove the pradice 
of iniUnt baptifm in their day.' Mr. Worcefter gives us 
T\ot 3 line from the writings of either \ n»r does he dired 
us where we may find fo much as a fcrap, which implies 
any fuch thing. If the reader will take the trouble to look 
Jiit Dr. Gale's Refledions on Dr. Wall's hiftory of infant 
baptifm, or into Hefmes Paftor's Vifions, Lib. I. Vif lii* 
chap. 23 5, 6, 7. he jpay difcover the reafon why Mr. Wor- 

* Sec Gale's Reflcdioos, 



Tivo Difcoutfc\^^ l^c, 59 

ftcRer made no quotations. It is evident, none would have 
been to his purpofe : for they fay not a word about infant 
baptifnij or any thing which looks like it, or implies it, (if 
we may credit either Dr. Wall or Dr. Gale) unlefs wa 
confider thefe fathers as being Papiftsy and then, becaufe 
they held to the corruption of nature, conclude that they 
muft to infant baptifm, as an antidote. But this argument 
is equally good, to prove that all the Caiviniftic Baptifts 
hold to infant baptifm. 

We may hence fee, with fufficient clearnefs, why Mr. 
Worcefter ventured no quotations from the fathers of the 
firft century : and for the fame reafon, probably, he ven- 
tured none from the fathers of the fecond. He only tells 
us, that * Juftin Martyr and Irenseus are more particular 
and clear, to the fame purpofe.* Yes, fays he, * more par- 
ticular and char^ yet not fo much as m.ention the fubjed". 

As Mr. Worcefter hath not feen fit to give us a line from 
the writings of the ancient fathers of the two firft centuries, 
1 will fet before the public a ftiort quotation out of the 
apology which Juftm Martyr made before the Roman em- 
peror ; it may be taken as a fample of the fentiment of the 
church in his time, as to baptifm and the fubjedls of bap- 
tifm. The pallage, as Mr. Reeves tranilates it, is, " I fhall 
now lay before you (fays Juftin to the emperor) the man- 
ner of dedicating ourfelves to God through Chrift, upon 
our cv'^nverfion \ for, fhould 1 omit this, I might feem not 
to deal fmcerely, in this account of the Chiiftian religion. 
As manyy therefore, as are perjuaded and heliei>e<, that the 
things taught and /aid by us are true, and moreover take 
upon them to Uve accordingly, are taught to pray and ajk of 
Gody ivith facing, the forgivenefs of their former fins ; — and 
then, and net tiU then, they are brought to a place of nvater, 
and — are washed in the nam.e of God the Father and 
Lord of all, and of our Saviour Jefus Chrift. — The reafon 
of this (fays Juftin) we have from the apoftles ; for having 
nothing to do in onv-jirjl birth, but being begotten by necej/ity^ 
or ivithout our own confent. — The penitent, who now makes 
his fecond birth (or his public putting on the Lord Jefus) 
an a8 of his own choice, has called over him the name of 
God the Father and Lord of all things, — And, moreover, 
the perfcn baptized and illuminated, is baptized in the 
name of the Lord Jefus, — and in the name of the Holy 
Ghoft." * 

• Booth's Paedobaptifm, Vol. II. p. no, m. 



Co Letters on Rev, 5. Worce/ier'*s 

This is one of Mr. Worcefter's witnefTes, and he is a 
good one, to fhow that Mr. Worcefter has endeavoured to 
palm an impofition upon the public : for here is not merely 
a filence, as to infant baptifm, but a complete prohibition 
of it. For the Martyr contrafts our natural birth with our 
baptifm, and tells us, that one is 'without our confenty but the 
other an a<S of our oivn choice. This is the Bible ivay, this 
Is the Chriftian way, this is the good old way, to receive 
baptifm as an ad of our own choice. But to be baptized 
without our confent, as all infants are, Is the way of man's 
invention, the papiftical way, the way of Antichrift. 

Nor does Irenaeus, nor any one of the fathers of the 
fecond century, fay one word, which he can prove to his 
purpofe.* 

Mr. Worcefter next comes down to the third century, 
and tells us, * Tertullian and Origen are explicit on the 
fubjed.' Then we may expert fomething to the purpofe. 
And what fays Tertullian ? Not a word which Mr. Wor- 
cefter quotes ; nor had he any thing to the point, to quote 
from him. But we will hear what Tertullian fays, for he 
has fomething to fay, and fomething too which Mr. Wor- 
cefter would be glad not to hear. 

Tertullian, fpeaking of repentance, of the ufe and necef- 
fity of it, fays, *' Baptifm is the feal of faith, which faith is 
begun and adorned by the faith of repentance. We are 
not, therefore, nvafied, that we 7nay leave Jinning, but be- 
caufe we have already done it, and are already purified in our 
hearts." f Dr. Gale, upon thefe words of Tertullian, makes 
the following obfervations, (p. 512, 513.) " Are thefe the 
words of a man, who thought baptifm might be given ta 
infants ? Are Infants already purified in heart i Have they 
left finning P and are they therefore luqfjjed P Have they any 
Inch faith as Tertullian here fpeaks of? and yet he fays, 
Baptifm, the feal of this fort oi faith particularly ; and there-' 
fore, doubtlefs he thought the feal could not be regularly 
applied, where this faith was wanting." 

This Is one of Mr. Worcefter's witnefTes for the begin- 
ning of the third century ; and we will hear a little more 
of his teftlmony. Mr. Booth gives us the following fenti- 
ments of Tertullian, out of Du Pin*s translation : " Jfefus. 
Ghrlft fays, Indeed, Hinder not little children from^oming t6 

* Sec Gale's Rcf. throughout, Booth's Padobap. Vol. 11. p. 79^8^' 
and even Dr. Wall himfelf. 

t IXe Pcnctentia, cap. vi. p. i%S- & 



Two Difcourfes^ bfc* 6i 

me ; but that they fliould come to him as foon as they are 
advanced in years, as foon as they have learned their reli- 
gion, when they may be taught whither they are going, 
when they are become Chriftians, when they begin to be 
able to know Jefus Chrlft. — Thofe who fhall duly confider 
the great weight and moment of this divine facrament, will 
rather be afraid of making too much hnjle to receive it, than to 
defer it for fome time, fo they may be the better capable 
of receiving it more worthily." * 

The public will probably be at no hefitancy, why Mr. 
Worceller produced no quotations for the two firft centu- 
ries, and for the beginning of the third : it is fufficiently 
obvious he had none to offer. It is not a httle furprifing, 
that he fhould prefume fo much upon the credulity of the 
public, as to fuppofe they would, in fuch an important 
matter as the present, take his bare word, as the ground of 
their belief, for the fpace of more than two hundred of the 
firft years of Chriftianity. 

The firft appearance of evidence, which Mr. Worcefter 
brings forward, in fupport of infant baptifm, is in the follow- 
ing reputed words of Origen : " What is the reafon, that, 
whereas the baptifm of the church is given for forgivenefs, 
infants alfo, by the ufage of the church, are baptized ; 
when, if there were nothing in infants which wanted for- 
givenefs or mercy, baptifm would be needlefs to them ?" 
This quotation Mr. Worcefter probably took from Rufi- 
nus's corrupt, and very little to be depended upon, tranf- 
lation of Origen, or from fome author who had drawn it 
from that fource. 

There are two reafons, which render it probable, that 
even Origen, who lived in the middle, if not towards the 
latter end of the third century, did not belitve in infant 
baptifm, and has fiid nothing in its favour. One reafon 
is, That nothing can be found, in any of his writings which 
are now extant, to fhow that he believed any fuch thing. 
The fther is, There are fome paftages, in his original 
Greek, v\hich appear not reconcileable with the fentiment, 
that Origen was a Pssdobaptift. I will mention one, and 
one too which D.r. Wall has felected out of the original 
writings of Origen, confider ing it to be as m.uch to his 
purpoi'e as any parage which ,can be depended upon as 
being Origen's. Mr. Booth gives us the paiTage from Dr. 
Wall, thus : " One may inquire, when it is that the angels^ 

'^ Boo'Ji's Fsedobaptlfin, Vol II. p. 9Z, 93^. 



62 Letters on Rev, S. WorceJler*s 

here fpoken of, are fet over thofe little ones, fliowed or 
fignified by our Saviour; whether they take the care and 
management of them, from the time when they, by the 
wafhing of regeneration, whereby they were new-born, do 
as new-born babes defire the fmcere milk of the word, and 
are no longer fiibje<5l to any evil power, or from their birth, 
according to the foreknowledge of God and his predefti- 
nating of them, &c."* 

We have two reafons to offer, why it is not fuppofable 
that Origen intended infants in age, but muft have intended 
infants in grace. One is, He fpeaks of them as defiring 
the fmcere milk of the word, which infants of a day or a 
month old are incapable of doing. The other reafon is. 
He is fpeaking of thofe little ones whofe angels do always 
behold the face of God in heaven. Thefe little ones are 
conlidered by Calviniftic divines, if not by all Others, to be 
believers in Chrift. 

Mr. Worcefter in the next place brings forward Cyprian, 
who was bifhop of Carthage, and prefident of a council 
which was holden in that city in the year 255. Before 
which council this queftion was difcuffed, " At what age 
Ihall infants be baptized ?" Infant baptifm being, at this 
tim*e, fo novel a thing, that the bifhops were in doubt at 
what age it fhould be adminiftered. 

This council, compofed of African bifhops, is the firft 
we read of, which explicitly admitted the fuperftitious and 
antichriftian pradice of infant baptifm. Not an European 
or Afiatic bifhop does Mr. Worcefler produce, for even 
the third century, who fpake one word in favour of infant 
baptifm : nor does he produce any credible evidence, that 
any in Africa adopted this practice, till the year 253, or 
nearly that date. And we confefs, that we are not careful 
nor folicitous to fhow, that infant baptifm did not, at this 
time, begin to prevail confiderably : for not far from this 
time, as I may at a future period fhow at large, the church 
cf Jefus began to take her place in the wildeinefs, as God 
had appointed her. 

Mr. Worcefter now comes down to the fourth century, 
and manifeftly with a confiderable d^t^xto, of courage, as 
well he may, for now he hath fomething to fhow for irifant 
baptifm : for the error for which he pleads, had not a 
little prevailed, before the end cf this century. Says he, 
* Gregory Nazianzen, Bafil, Ambrofe, Chryfoftome, and 

* Wall's Hift. of Inf. Bap. Part I. p 33. 



Two Difcourfes^ Iffc. 63 

Jerome, all of whom flourifhed within about a hundred 
years of Orlgen and Cyprian, are all explicit on the fub- 
jeS. ; explain the defign of infant baptifm, mention it as 
coming in the place of circumcifion, and fpeak of it as the 
univerfal and undifputed practice of the church,' 

Mr. Worcefter, even in this fourth century, which was 
famous for the invention of fuperftitious ceremonies, runs 
a httle too faft, and takes more for granted in fix lines, 
than he will be able to prove in the fame number of years. 
We are willing to grant him every word of truth, for we 
fear nothing from that quarter ; but we muft correift him 
ftep by ftep, that no impofition may be palmed on the* 
public. He tells us, that Gregory Nazianzen, Bafil, who 
was bilhop of Cefarea ; Ambrofe, who was bifliop of Mi- 
Ian ; Chryfoftome, bifliop alternately of Antioch and Con- 
ftantinople ; and Jerome, monk of Jerufalem, are, all of 
them, not only explicit on the fubje(5l of infant baptifm, but 
that they fpake of it as the univerfal and undifputed prac- 
tice of the church. 

We by no means deny that infant baptifm was, in this 
century, pradifed in the church of Rome ; but that it was 
the univerfal practice of the church, as Mr. Worcefter 
aiferts, Is not true, unlefs he Intends the univerfal pradice 
of the church of Antichrift, which now very manifeftly 
fhowed herfelf, and had already driven the gofpel church 
into her hiding place. 

A few quotations will expofe Mr. Worc'efter*s miftakes. 

" Gjegory Nazianzen, fpeaking of fuch as died without 
baptifm, inftances in fuch as were not baptized {dia nepi- 
efita) by reafon of their infancy. And the fame Nazianzen 
himfelf, though a bifnop's fon, and a long time trained up 
under his father's care, was not baptized till he came to 
age, as he tells us in his own life." * 

" Again, St. Gregory advifes people to delay their chil- 
dren's baptifm, till they are capable to hear and anfwer 
fome of the holy words." f 

" Ambrofe and Chryfoftome, though born of Chriftlan 
parents, were not baptized till they were adult." J 

" St. Ambrofe, St. Jerome, and St. Auftin, were born 
of Chriftian parents, and yet not baptized till the full age 
of man, or more."J 

* Gale's Refleaious, p. 39. f Ibid. 41. 

I Hift. Eng. Bapt. Vol. II, Appcn. p. 68. S Itti'l- Vol. I. pref. p. 51. 



64 Letters on Rev. S. Worcejier^s 

From thefe quotations, we fee that Gregory, Chryfof- 
tome, Ambrofe, and Jerome, four of Mr. Worcefter's five 
worthies, whom he brought to prove the univerfaHty of 
paedobaptifm in the fourth century, were jthemfelves the 
children of Antipaedobaptifts ; their parents being Chrif- 
tians, and one or more of them bilhops, yet did not have 
their children baptized : befides, Gregory, the firft of them, 
advifed the delay of infant baptifm, till they were capable 
to hear and anfwer fome of the holy words. The public 
^will judge what credit is to be attached to Mr. Worcefter's 
afTertions. 

We will now hear what he has to fay of paedobaptifm 
in the fifth century. The public will obferve how he la- 
bours, continually, to imprefs his readers with an idea, that 
what he relates is much nigher the beginning of Chriftian- 
ity than what it really is. What he fays, with relation to 
infant baptifm in the fifth century, is this : — 

* Auftln, who was cotemporary with fome of thefe laftf and 
who flouripjed only ahcut tivo hundred and eighty years after 
the apofllesi in a controverfy with Pelagius, alleged the 
pradice of infant baptifm, in proof of the doftrine of orig- 
inal fin. " Why are infants (fays he) baptized for the 
remiffion of fin, if they have none ? Infant baptifm the 
whole church pra<flifes : it was not inftituted by councils, 
but was ever in ufe." Pelagius, .whofe interefi^ it was to 
fet this argument afide, was fo far from denying the al- 
leged fad:, that in reply to the fuggeftion of fome, that by 
denying original fin he denied the right of infants to bap- 
tifm, he utterly difcards the idea, and afiiims, that he never 
heard of any, not even the mofi; impious heretic, who de- 
nied baptifm to infants. 1 his teftimony (fays Mr. Wor- 
cefl.er) is impregnable.' Why fo ? for to it we anfwer — 

1. The whole of this, fo far as it has any formidablenefs 
in it, may be a forgery, as many other things, of the like 
nature, have been proved to be. 

2. To make the moft of it, it is but the afTertion of one 
man ; and if this one man's fingle aifertion, fhould not be 
more corre<5l than foipe of Mr. Worcefter's, it might not 
be thought impregnable, 

3. It is not only the afTertion of but one man, but this 
one man does not aflert, that there is none who denies 
infant baptifm ; but that he has heard of none. Now, if 
this Pelagius had not heard of every thing, his aflertion 
might be true^ and yet the whole body of Chrift's vifible 
church might deny baptifm to infants : for, 



Tvjo Dlfcourfes^ isfc, 65 

4. The vifible church of Chi ill was, at this time, hidden 
ill the place which God had prepared for her ; and little 
or nothing was now feen or heard of the true go/pel churchy 
in what was called the Chriftiun world } but the church of 
AnUchriJl was in high repute. Hence, 

5. if Pelagius fpake or wrote the words which Mr, 
Worcefler fuppofes, and if they were the limple truth of 
his heart, they only prove, that Pelagius knew nothing of 
the hidden church of Chrift. They by no means prove 
•what Mr. Worcefttr wifhed them to, that the church of 
Chrift held to infant baptifm. 

As to what Auilin, or Auguftine, fays, " Infant baptifm 
the whole church pra<5tifes : it was not inftituted by coun- 
cils, but was ever in ufe ;" we anlwer — 

1. That he had rerpe<^ 10 the church of Antichrift, 
which alone was in reputation in his day ; and the whole 
of this church did, no doubt, then, as it does ftill, pradlife 
infant baptilVn. 

2. As to Auftin's faying, *' Infant baptifm was ever in 
«,y?," we need only obferve, if Auitin thus faid, he made a 
large niiftake. 

Mr. Worcefter in the next paragraph is rather too bold 
in his a.Tertion. His words are, * From this period (fays 
he) the matter is clear, beyond difpute. Dr. Gill himfelf, 
one of the morl: learned of the Antlpaedobaptift writers, 
acknowledges that infant baptifm was the pradice of the 
churc^. univerfally, from the third to the eleventh century.^ 
Wert' t not that I am grown familiar with Mr. Worcefter's 
erroneous (latements and groundlefs aifertions, this might 
a little furprife me. I will give the public Dr. Gill's own 
words, and then each will judge for himfelf* 

Says the Do<f^cr, in his Brief Illuftrations, &c. chap, ii, 
conf. 4. " Chrift has no \riiere promifed, that his dodrine 
and ordinances (hould not be perverted ; but, on the con- 
trary, has given char and Jirong intimations, that there 
(hould be a general falling aivayy and departure from the 
truth and ordinances of the gofpel, to make way for the 
revelation of Antichrijl : and though it will be allowed, that 
during this period infant baptifm prevailed, yet it did not 
univerfaUy obtain. There were nvitnejcs for aduli haptifm ifji 
every age : and Chrift had a church in the iviidernejsf in ob- 
fcurity, at thi^ time, namely, in the vallies of Piedmont i 
who were, from the beginning of the apojiafy^ and Vritnetied 
againft it, and bore their tejlimony agaitjfi infant baptifm.** 



6$ Letters en Rev, S. Worcejier's 

It is nothing ftrange, that a perfon engaged, as Mr. 
Worcefter is, in the caufe of Antichrift, Ihould pervert and 
mifreprefent the ancients ; but that a perfon of fenfe ftiould 
expole his charader and veracity, in flagrantly mifrepre- 
fenting the moderns, as he does, is not a little to be won- 
dered at. 

Aftec faying juft what he pleafed, not only without evi- 
dence, but contrary to evidence, he produces a quotation 
from Dr. Wall's hiftory of infant bapufm, as he- tells 
us, and the quotation itfelf is equally afide from truth, 
with his other quotations, and affertions of his owti. Not 
in one inftance does he inform us where any of his quota- 
tions are to be found : he probably did not know, or w^as 
not fond of their being examined. 

As he comes near the clofe of this long note, to which 
we have given confiderable attention, he obferves, * The 
miprejudiced read3r will now judge, with how much can- 
dour and truth, an attempt has been made, in fome late 
publications, to m.ake the unlearned and unftable believe, 
that the pradice of infant baptifm had its rife in the dark 
ages, under the influence of popery.* I add, The unpreju- 
diced reader will now judge, with how^much candour and 
truth, an attempt has been made, by Mr. Worcefter, to 
make the unlearned and unftabie believe, that the human 
rite of infant baptifm had its rife in the days of the apoftles, 
and that it was practifed for twelve or fifteen hundred years ^ 
no one forhidding it. Efpecially, fmce the fame Mr. Wor- 
cefter tells us, that 'from Walafrid Strabo (a man, fays 
Molheim, of no mean reputation) fome paifages have been 
quoted, in which he reprefents infant baptifm as having 
had its origin about the time of St. Auftin :' which, in- 
deed^ appears to have been the time of the introdudion of 
infant baptifm into England.* 

* As to the affertion (fays Mr, W^orcefter) in the Minia- 
ture Hiftory of the Baptifts, " That the Waldenfes, Wick- 
iiffites, and Huflites were Baptifts," it may fuffice to fay, 
there is fufficient evidence that it has no foundation in 
truth.' Here Mr. Worcefter takes all for granted. Let 
Mr. Worcefter, or let any other perfon, attempt to (how 
th^it it is not founded in truth, then will the author of it en- 
deavour, if life and health continue, to ftiow fuch an at- 
tempt to be vain ; and not only fo, but that the Miniature 
Hiftory is founded on tlie broad bafis of truth. For the 

* See Hift. Eng. Bapt. Vol. IT. prcf. ' ' *' ' ' 



Two Difcourfesy l5fc, 6j 

prefent, it fhall be only obferved, that as Mr. Wofceftef 
and his brethren can trace their defcent from the Papifts, 
and their peculiarities, fuch as infant haplifmt infant church 
memberfliip, unbelievers? baptifm, baptifm upon the faith 
of others, &c. from the man of fin, and no farther ; fo the 
Baptifts can trace their defcent, and their peculiarities, fuch 
as believers* baptifm, communion of faints, &c. to the 
Waldenfes, Wickliffites, Huffites, Petrobrufians, &c. and 
through them to the apoftles, and to the Bible, where they 
ftill find their peculiarities, and an account of their anceftors. 

Thus far it appears that Mr Worcefter is fubftantially 
incorreft, in every material point. Not to 2^ Jingle difficulty 
has he put the Baptifts, unlefs flie trouble of dete(5ling his 
antifcriptural and erroneous notions of the gofpel church, 
and the expofmg of his falfe pofitions, be conlidered one. 

It is hoped, that the reader's deeds are not fo evil, and 
his heart fo hard, that he will rejed the light, and refufe 
to come to it, left his deeds fhould be reproved. Eternity 
will reveal all errors and remove ignorance, ^ but it will 
never convert and fave fuch as hate the light. 

In the mean time, 

I am, the reader's and the public's, &c^ _ 



We appeal to the Bible, to Jiuhhorn fads, and to 
common fenfe. 



LETTER VIII. 

M€N, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 

VV E would not foUcit your attention to any 
more of Mr. Worcefter's miftakes, were it not that the 
honour of the Chriftian Lawgiver, the advancement of his 
rifmg church, and your own happinefs, require that you 
fhould know the truth. 

Mr. Worcefter in the firft place took a wrong fet off, 
and he has fo exadtly kept his firft dire<5tion, that he has 
feldom come within fight of truth's highway. His notions 
of the church of Chrift appear to be as erroneous as were 
the notions of the old Jewiih church with refpe(5t to Chrift 



68 Letters on Rev. S, Worce/ler*s 

himfelf. He alfo appears to be as ready to mi/lake wha^ 
is faid of the gofpel church, as the Jews were to miftrtke 
what Chrift faid of himfelf. Not only fo, but he is, mani- 
feftly, equally ready to mifreprefent tlie fentimept ai}d 
pradice of the gofpel church, that he may make room for 
his Judaizing fentiments, and for his Jewifh church in 
gofpel times. 

Page 57, he tells the public, that * when the Antipsedo- 
baptifts would prove that the Abrahamic covenant has 
ceafed, the arguments advanced only go to (how that the 
Mofaic law, or Sinai covenant, is abolifhed.' 

From this flatement of the matter, no one would receive 
a jull idea of the fentiments or arguments of the Antipasdo- 
baptifts. They have no difpoiition to prove, that the 
Abrahamic covenant, which included the promife, that in 
him and in his feed all the families of the earth Ihould be 
blefled, has ceafed. But when they would prove, that the 
Abrahamic covenant of circumcificn has ceafed, their argu- 
ments go to fhow, that the law of commandments con- 
tained in ordinances is abolifhed, and that the covenant of 
circumcifion is one of thefe commandments and ordinances. 
Let Mr. Worcefter and his brethren prove the contrary, if 
they be able. 

Again, pages 57,58, fays he, * When they would prove, 
that the infant feed of the church ought nor 10 be bap- 
tized, the arguments adduced only go to (how, that be- 
lievers, who have never received baptifm, ought to be 
baptized.' 

Mr. Worcefter is very forgetful, or he knows be'ter thaa 
to mifreprefent matters in this way. He knows, or ought 
to know, for he has had the means of knowing, that the 
arguments of the Antipaedobaptifts go to prove, that the 
gofpel pre-requifite to baptifm is fuch as new-born infants 
cannot pofTefs, and therefore are excluded from the ordi- 
nance, by the pre-requifite enjoiiied in the inftitution. Had 
he have told the public, that the arguments of the Anti- 
psedobaptifts go to prove, that the gofpel enjoins, that per- 
fens fhall be taught, or difcipled, previous to baptifm, and 
Cnce new-born infants can be neither taught nor difcipled 
they are not to be baptized, then v/ould he have told us 
the fimple truth. But the plain truth would not have 
ferved his purpofe ; he therefore chofe to mifreprefent us, 
cr elfe he has very ignorantly dcme it. 

Mr. Worcefter's j^/A inference, page 64, mnft now com- 
jpand a little atteniiort^ and it is worthy of it, both on 



Two Difcourfes^ ?5fr. 69 

iiccount of its novelty and the popifii method which he 
hath adopted in its fupport. The inference is, * It may be- 
inferred from our fubje<5l, xh^.1 fprinkl'ing or affufton is a valid 
and fcriptural mode of baptifm' 

Would it not have been more fatisfa<5tory to the public, 
had Mr. Worcefter have fhown us from the word of God, 
that fprinkUng or qffufton is a valid and fcriptural mode of 
baptilm : but this he could not do. He has done the beft 
he could : be has inferred from his fubje<5l that it is fo ; 
he has alfo endeavoured to prove it. His argument is, in 
fliort, the following :^ — 

The P?Edobaptift church is the true gofpel church. The 
true gofpel church, in all ages, has, according to the pur- 
pofe and promife of God, had effentially corre6l views of 
the facraments* I'he true church, for twelve or fifteen 
huiidred years, univerfally, allowed baptifm by fprinkling 
er affufion to be fcriptural and valid. * Hence, if baptifm 
by iprinkling or affufion be not valid and fcriptural, then^. 
for the firft twelve or fifteen hundred years, the views of 
the whole body of the Chriftian world refpe<fting baptifm, 
the firft facrament of the church, were effentially erroneous.'^ 

Here, as his manner elfewhere is, he takes for granted 
the very things, and the only things, which have need to. 
be proved, and then draws his qonclulion#. as though his 
premifes were eftablifhed. 

In the firft place, he takes for granted that the Paedo^ 
baptift church is the true gofpel church, which the Anti^ 
paedobaptifts have always denied ; a,nd they have ev^r con^ 
fidered paedobaptifm as a badge of Antichrift, if not her 
effential charadteriftic. 

His next premife is fully granted, and is, no doubt,, 
fufficiently corredl ; and, if true, will ipoil his bufinefs o£ 
fprinkling and affufion. It is this. The true gofpel churchy 
in all ages, has, according to the purpofe and promife of 
God, had effentially corre<^ views of the facraments.. 

We will now hear his other pofition, which is. The true 
church, for twelve or fifteen hundred years, univerfally, 
allowed baptifm by fprinkling or affufion to be fcriptural 
and valid.. 

Had not Mr. Worcefter have dealt fo largely in univerfal 
affirmatives, he would net have fo largely expofed hirafelf 
to fevere reproof at every turn. 

The hiftoric truth is juft this, The true church of Chrift 
never, in any age, allowed fprinkling or affufion to be fcri^ • 

F 2 



7© Letters on Rev, S. Worcejler^s 

tural and valid baptifm. But Mr. Worcefter is, in fa<5^, 
fpeaking of the church of Antichrift ; and had he kept 
hiftoric truth en his fide, even with refped to her, he v/ould 
have been lefs cenfurable than he now is. He, doubtlefs, 
had the hiftory of Antichrift before him, and might have 
been as correal as fhe is ; but even the general corruptions 
of Antichrift were not fufficiently erroneous for him, but 
he muft have them always to have been as great as they 
were v/hen they came to their higheft degree of perfednefs. 
Hiftory informs us, that even AntichriU had not obtained 
that degree of prefumption, as to fet afide the form or 
matter of gofpel baptifm, and to change ii for fprinkhng 
or affufion, except in cafes of fjcknefs or forae bodily in- 
firmity, till the year 1305 -, when Pope Clement the fifth, 
at the fecond fynod of Ravenna, approved, that baptifm 
might be given, no neceffity compelling^ by fprinkling.* 

Indeed, in Germany, fo late as the year 1542, it was not 
generally known, If at all, that any, even in the x;hurch of 
Antichrilt, prad:ifed or allowed Iprinkling, fave in the cafe 
of ficknefs or other infirmity, as the following affures us ; — 
•' Johannes Bugenhagius Pomeranus, when he faw, at 
Hamburgh, an infant brought to baptifm, wrapped in 
fwaddling clothes, and water fprinkled upon its head, was 
amazed ; for that, except in the cafe of neceffity, for per- 
fons fick in their beds, he had neither feen, nor heard, nor 
in any hiftory read, of any fuch thing. Whereupon there 
being a convocation of all the minifters, it was afked of 
Mr. John Fritz, who had been formerly minifter at Lubeck, 
how baptifm was there adminiftered, who anfwered, " In- 
fants w^ere there, as in all Germany, baptized naked ; but 
he was ignorant how that peculiar manner cf baptizing 
had crept in at Hamburgh '^ *' At length it was agreed 
amongft them, that they Ihould fend to know the opinion 
of Luther, and the divines at Wertemberg, in this matter ; 
which being done, Luther wrote back 10 Hamburgh, that 
this fprinkling was an abufe, which ought to be removed ; 
that thereupon immerfion was reftored at Hamburgh." j 

It was not till the year 1603, that, fprinkling obtained a 
peaceable footing in England j and even to this day, uniefs 
their rubrick has been lately changed, their priefts are 
©bliged to dip the well children in the water. J 

• Hift. £ng. Bapt Vol. II. Appendix, p. 7©. + ft>id- 

^ Ste feng, Ci urch Rubrick on Baptifm, 



Tivo Difcourfes^ Isfc^ yi-^ 

Even when fprinkllng was fubfti Luted for baptifm, in 
cale of ficknefs, yet it v\as a doubtful matter, at beft, whe- 
ther it were in fad Cbriftian baptilhij or would anfwer for 
it. This is evident, from what the pTiriiitive fathers in the 
church of Antichivft have faid upon the fubjcdt, Cyprian 
thought it rr.ight be fo conlidered.* But this fprinkiir.g or 
pouring for baptifm, was tliought and judged lo imperfed, 
that it was not thouglit lawful for any who were baptized 
in this way, to be admitted to any office in the church. 
See this point fiated fomtwhat largely in l^r. Gale's Re-i 
fledions, from page 207 to 212. 

What cculd have induced Mr. WorceOer to have framed 
fuch palpable miftakcs, the public will judge, e.^ch one for 
himfelf. How he, in a land of freedom, where every one 
has liberty to fpeak and wriie the truth, could contradict 
the Bible, ftubborn fads, and common fenfe, as he has done, 
is a problem I know not how otl.erwift to folve, than to 
confider him fo blinded by prejudice and party, that he 
knew not what he faid, nor whereof he affirmed. Indeed, 
^le appears exceeding mad againll the church of Chriil, and 
as he proceeds in his pages his difpofition to mifreprefent 
her increafes. 

r pafs over feveral unfounded a/Tertions, that I may come 
the looner to a mod notorious flip of his pen, judgment, 
information, or confcience. He will cloak himfelf under 
which he pleafes ; but one thing is certain, that the follow- 
ing aifertion of his is a notorious untruth. Say^s he, page 
66, » The Anabaptifts, or APitipasdobaptiifs, my brethren, 
are a fed of modern date.* He adds another fentence, 
which is no lefs contraiy from ftubborn fads than is the 
preceding. * They (fays he) had their origin fome time 
after the reformation under Luther and Calvin ; and their 
origin, certainly, though we would by no means reproach 
our more regular brethren of the prefent day with it, was 
but very little calculated to imprefs a belief that the true 
church of God was only to be found among them.' 

The origin of the Antipaedobaptifts (or of the Anabap^ 
lifts, as they were ftyled by their enemies by way of con- 
tempt, as Chriftians were once called Nazarenes) Mr. Wor- 
cefter knows not, or he will not acknowledge j iie therefore 
cannot inform us whether it was honourablef or the rsverfe,, 
* They had their origin (he fays) fome time after the 
refoimation under Luther and Calvin.' But the fa-d is, 

* Cyprian, Ept. Corr, ad Fabium, apud Niccph fub. 6. cap. 3. 



^2 Letters on- Rev. S, Worcefler*s 

tfieir origin cannot be found by their enemies : for they 
are unwilling to find \t among the difciples of John and of 
Chrirt, where it really is. They can find it no where elfe. 
But to expofe Mr. Worcefter's ralhnefs, relative to the 
origin of the Baptifts, Anabaptifts, or Antipasdobaptilts, I 
will give the public a fhort account of it, or rather of the 
Pasdobaptifts' entire uncertainty or ignorance in this mat- 
ter, as ftated by Moflieim, in his celebrated hiftory of the 
church of Antichrift. His words are, "The XxMt origin of 
that feSy ivhich acquired the denomination of the Anabaptifts 
by their adminifteiing anew the rite of baptifm to thofe 
who come over to their communion, and derived that of 
Mennonites from the famous man to whom they owe the 
greateft part of their prefent felicity, is hid in the remote 
depths of antiquity, and is of confequence extremely dijicult to 
he ajcertained. This uncertainty will not appear furprifmg, 
when it is confidered, that this fe(5l darted up all of a fuddeny 
in feveral countries at the fame point of timet under leaders of 
different talents and different intentions, and at the licry 
period when the Jirjl contefl of the reformers with the Roman 
pontiffs drew the attention of the world, and employed the 
pens of the learned, in fuch a manner as to render all other^ 
obje(5ls and incidents almoft matters of indifference."* 

Mr. Worcefter will not deny the teftimony of his brother 
Mofheim ; if he fhould, a multitude of others might be 
produced, to eftablifh, in fubftance, the fame faft. 

After making feveral other affertions, not founded ia* 
fa<5l, he fays, page 67, * Can we, then, believe that their 
mode of baptifm only is fcriptural and valid ? If fo, what 
becomes of the faithfulnefs of God to his promifes ? ' 

Reply. Did God ever promife to continue the gofpel^ 
ordinances to the church of Antichrift ? Or, is he unfaith- 
ful to his promifes, if he have not continued the true gofpel 
baptifm, through all generations, in the antichriftian church 
of Rome ? The church of Chrift, as Mr. Worcefter ought 
to know, and he would recolle(5l, were he not darkened by 
the traditions of men, hath been in the wildemefs twelve 
hundred and fixty years, during which time we are not to- 
expe<5t that the hiftory of Antichrift will give i;s much- 
corre(5i: information refpeding her. Nor can we depend' 
upon their accounts being either friendly or juit. Befides,. 
at the beginning of the reformation under Luther and,' 
Calvin, the church left her wildemefs ftation, and arofe as- 

* Cent. 1 6, fed, 3. part a. chap. 3. 



Two Di/courfes^ ^c, 73 

/ro?n the dcady and appeared in many pJaceSf almojl at the fame 
point of time. And during the refornialion, God lliewed to 
both Luther and Calvin, as you may lee by their writings, 
whiU was the true gofpel . baptilm ; but neither tliey nor 
their followers would be faithful in the pradice of it : but 
the church of Chrift hath both known and obferved it, and 
will ftill do thus. 

The public ought to be apprized, that Mr. Worcefler, 
from beginning 10 end of his Sermons, has been pleading 
the caufe, and for the church and ordinance, of Antichrift ; 
then will they not be greatly furprifed, to hear him com- 
bine fprinklin^ and many other things, which he and his 
brethren have praciiied, and then fay, *The man who could 
believe it (that is, that thefe things are, taken together, all 
erroneous, and the fooner demoliflied the better) Vv^ould 
find but very little difficulty in believing, that the Bible is 
a cunningly devifed fable, &c.* And, fays he, page 69, 
* The fair and invincible conclufion then is, that fpiinklir.g 
or afFufion, the mode of baptifm pra(5lifed in thefe churches, 
is fcriptural and valid.' 

Mr. Woreefter has taken the fame courfe of argumenta- 
tion to fupport the validity of fprinkling or afFufion, which 
the mother of harlots has employed to prove all her filthy 
abominations to be fcriptural and valid ; and her conclufion 
is equally ftrong, fcriptural, and valid with his. Yes, and 
the Bible too muft be confidered as a cunningly devifed 
fable, if his antifcripturai and papiftical notion of fprinkling 
be net granted, as being both fcriptural and valid. 

Now follows another of his confequences. * Accord- 
ingly (fays he) there is nothing in the fcriptures againft it, 
(fprinkling for biipiifm) but much, did time permit, in 
favour of it' What a pity he had not taken a little time, 
to have mentioned at leail one palf^ge in favour of fprink- 
ling ? Till he does, he will be conliJered as having dene 
the work of the Lord deceitfully. 

, We have already feen, that ilubborn fa\fts, recorded by 
hiftorians, both ancient and modern, are to Mr. Worcefter- 
as rotten wood. Ke runs dirediy through them, and af- 
ferts juil the contrary, without givhig a fnow of reafon why 
he does fo. He has alfo begun to treat xh^ Bible in the. 
fame manner. But his boldnefs hitherto is quite out- done, 
by his daring and prelumptuous afferiif ns in the two para- 
graphs which next foliov/. Thefe two i fhall tranfcribe 
entire, that they may-ftand as perpetual monum.ents oi his 
too great boidneis. Says he, 



74 Letters on Rev, S. Worcejier^s 

' We have no evidence in the fcrlptures., that in the days oj 
Chrijl and his apojlles, any perfon was baptized by dippings or 
tmmerjion.* 

* Jifter all the laborious and ojlentatious criticifm upon thi 
Greek ivord baptizo^ it Jlill remains a faEt^ ivell known to alt 
who are verfed in the Greek language^ that the uje of that word 
determines nothings in refpe£i to the particular mode in which 
'water is to be applied in baptifm. It is, in a variety of injlanccst 
in the Greek fcripturesy and in other Greek writings^ ufed W 
Jignify a wajhing or cleanjingy which loas performed by Jprmk^ 
ling or pouring'; and mhy as properly f^gnify fprinkling cr pour- 
ing y as plunging or dipping.* 

Upon thele words of Mr. Worcefter*s, I (hall juft mak6 
the following obfervations, 

r. Had Mr. Worcefter been ignorant of the Greek, his 
ignorance might have plead for him, that his fault was but 
Xhe Jin oi prefumptive igtiorance,' 

2. Mr. Worcefter having given us no inftance, from any 
writings, either facred or profane, in which the word bapti%9 
is ufed in the fenfe in which he tells us it is, in a variety of 
inflances, in the Greek fcriptures, and in other Greek writ- 
ings, he is therefore not entitled to the belief of any perfon, 

3. Mr. Worcefter does not appear to believe himfelf j 
for in his note, on the next page, he endeavours to parry. 
the charge of prefumption and falfehood, which he proba- 
bly expedled would be made out againft: him, and fays^ 
•■ It is important to be remembered, that when words are ufed 
in reference to divine injlitutionsy and to fpiritual things^ they 
have an appropriate meaning, which can never be deter- 
mined from the mecm'mg which they have in common ufe* 
A perfon who would believe this papiftical turn and newly 
vamped deception o{ Mr. Worcefter's, deferves to be igno- 
rant. Let the common people but believe him in this, and 
be can make them Papifts at once. 

To give his obiervatton a fhow of reafon, he tells us, that • 
* de'pnon fignities a feaft or common meal, and yet we think 
it fufficient to take a fmall piece of bread and a very little 
wine/ But do not the evangelifts Mark and Luke fully 
explain this matter, and tell us, that what is called the 
Lord s fvpper was at moft but a fmall part of the fupper 
which they ate at the time ? Can Mr. Worcefter fhow any 
exception, with refped to baptifm, and make it appear that, 
the word is ufed in a diminutive fenfe I then would his 
obfervation not be fo in the face c^i fcripture and common 
fenfe, as it now is. But even tii€U» it-would be nothing t© 



. Two Difcourfss^ ^c. y^ 

his purpofe; for it would make no more than this-^that 
a partial immerfion, or very I'mall part inimerfed, would be 
baptifm. Eefides, if we can know nothing of the ordinances^ 
or of dhine things^ by the uie of woids in their commonly 
received fenfe, then may the common people be deceived 
juft 'when and ivhere and fo much as their defigning priefts 
(hall choofe. If Mr. Worceiier think to tread thus upon 
the necks of his own people, 1 pray the merciful Lord to 
deliver others from fuch deceptions. 

4. Mr. Worcefter cannot produce, a paflage, from Gen- 
efis to Revelation, in which bapii%o is ufed for fprinkling. 
If he will do it, I agree to make conceffions, before faints 
and finners, as publickly as he Ihall prefcribe. I do not 
fay, I will make conceffions, if he will aflert that it is thus 
ufed, but if he will (how it to be thus : and till he dees, he 
is, in my judgment, worthy to lie under the imputation of 
having dehgnedly or arrogantly impofed upon all the un- 
le;irned in his own fociety, and in every other, and upon 
the public generally. 

5. Mr. Worcefter tells us, that bapt'ixo, or to baptize, 
* may as properly fignify fprinkling or pouring, as plunging 
or dipping ;' and yet he adds, ' It is important to be remem- 
bered, that when words are ufed in reference to divine injli^ 
tutionst and X.0 fpiritual things y they have an appropriate mean* 
ing, which can never be determined from the meaning 
w^hich they have in their common ufe.* Here, according 
to Mr. Worcefter, the word hapii%o means any thing which 
either he or his opponents choofe, and from its meaning 
nothing can be determined by either. This very exadtly 
con^iports with what fome of the blind leaders are bold 
enough to fay, 2 hat common people can never knoiv for them' 

Jelves ivhat baptifm isy but mufl believe it to be 'what their miu' 
ifiers tell them. 

Nor has he given the public any better argument than 
this, to prove that the human invention of fprinkling is the 
divine inftitution of baptifm. His argument is this — ♦ The 
Paedobaptift, or, more ftridiy fpeaking, the Psedorantift 
denomination, is the vifible church of Chrift. The vifible 
church of Chrift hath been eifentially corred in her notions 
of the gofpel baptifm, and fJje hath held fprinkling to be 
fcriptural and v^lid baptiim ; therefore fprinkling is the 
true gofpel baptifm.' Juft fo his holinefs the pope argues— 
/' The holy catholic church of Home is the true vifible 
gofpel church. The true vifible gofpel church hath ever 
had juft' notions of the faerament 'of the fupper ; ^nd fhe 



76 Letters on Rev. S. Wcrcejhr^s 

hath for many bimdred years believed, that the bread and 
wine, after the conlecration of the prieft, are changed into 
the real body and bleed of Chrift : therefore the doctrine 
of tranfubftantiation is fcriptural and valid. So are, for 
the fiime reafons, the do^^rines of purgatory, extreme unc 
tion, praying to the virgin Mary and to images, counting 
of beads, and all the other fripperies of the church of 
Rome, fcripturai and valid/' Thus we fee that Mr. Wor- 
cefter's argument and the pope's are juft the fiime, and 
¥ifed to eftablifh the fame point — that man's inventions are 
God's inditutions. 

Mr. Worcefter denies that the pope's church is the vifible 
church of Chrift, and fo the pope's argument is fpoiled. 
We equally deny, that Mr. Worcefter's unbaptized church 
is the vifible church of Chrift, his argument therefore #alls 
to the ground equally as did the pope's. 

In pages 69, 70, Mr. Worceller has a note, which 
deferves attention. His words are, * It has been a con> 
mon thing with the Antipaedobaptifts, to fpeak very dif- 
refpe*51fully of learning and learned men ; but of late, one 
can hardly meet with an Antipiedobaptift, who is not 
prepared to talk fo fluently and fo learnedly of the meaning 
of Greek and Latin words, as almoft to amaze one. Even 
the author of Seven Sermons, on the mode and fubje<5ts of 
baptifm, " defires to thank God that he knows the Greek 
as well as any man ;" and has two or three fermons almoft 
wholly upon the meaning of a few Greek and Latin words. 
On this fubje«fl, however, though from his manner one 
might be led to fuppofe it had never before been attended 
to, he has nothing materially new : nothing but what was 
furnifhed to his hands by Dr. Gill, and other Anabaptift 
writers ; and nothing but what has been repeatedly and 
unanfwerabiy anfwered. He aiferts much, but proves very 
little ; and yet, with an authoritive air, but little becoming 
a Chriftian minifter, he requires us all to fubmit to his 
affertions, on pain of being placed at the ban of the kingdom 
of Chrift!' 

Upon this part of his note (and more of it will be'pro- 
duced foon) the following remarks may merit fome at- 
tention. 

I. If learning have been generally mifufed by- learned 
men, as it has by Mr. Worcefter, to mifreprefent the tkar- 
a(5lers and fentiments of the Antipaedobaptifts, it is not to 
be wondered at, if they have fpoken diirefpecftfully of both. 



Two Difcourfesy l^fc, jj 

2. As to the contemptuous manner in which he fpeaks 
of me, it is but a fmall thing, as it refpedls me perfonallir ; 
but as to his merit or demerit, ' in publifhing an hearfay 
exprefllon, intentionally to my difadvantage, the public 
will judge. Notwithftanding his ajfertion and re-ajfertmi, 
that 1 have made the expreffion forneivhere^ and before 
fome perfons, whom Solomon would call tale-bearers, I 
ftill confider it a flander, and the accufation as falfe as the 
manner of his publidiing it was illiberal. Had I have 
made the expreffion, would any man, had he a good caufe 
to defend, have employed fuch kind of defence ? No man, 
who fuitably regards his own reputation, will, in a religious 
controverfy, feek th^fupport of his caiife by lefFening, in any 
uncivil method, the chara6ter of his opponent. Should I 
lower the charader of Mr. Worcefter, it fhall be becaufe I 
am compelled to it, by fetting in plain view how he has 
expofed himfelf. I will not mention what I know of the 
man, nor will I utter what fame hath reported ; my bufi- 
nefs with him, before the public, is upon what he hath 
committed to the infpeclion of the whole; 

What advantage he could propofe to himfelf, or to his 
denomination, by telling the public, that my Sermons con- 
tained nothing materially new, and that what I had fatd 
was furnillied to my hand by Dr. Gill and others, is diffi- 
cult to afcertain, unlefs it were to make me appear as fmall 
as he could, that my opponents might confider their tafe 
to be eafy, and the produ<5lions of my pen to be fcaree 
worth reading. But whether my Sermons be great or 
f7naU, whether they •contain things nciv or oldf whether the 
fubje<ft matter of them were furniflied to my hand by Dr. . 
Gill (a page of wliofe writings I had then never feen upon 
the fubjedl) or by any other perfon, is not the point. The 
queftion of importance is, Do they contain ftubborn fa^s, 
fo handled by common fenjTe as to expofe the Pa;dobaptift 
errors, by the exhibition of plain truth ? 

3. What he tells the public, of my requiring perfons to 
believe what my Sermons contain, upon pain of being 
placed at the bafi{xh2.l is, the curfe, or execration) of the 
kingdom of Chrift, is equally unfounded with his other 
affertions. 

We will now hear fome more of his note. ,Says he, 
* The word hapti%o, as conceded on all hands, fignifies to 
qvafi.* Here he miflakes again. It is not, by any means, 
conceded, that bapti%,o fignifies to ivaflt^ in the common 

' '' " G 



7^ Letters on Rev. S. Worcejler^s 

acceptation of that word. It fignifies to waih-in a fpecific 
fenfe ; to wafh by immerrioii, dipping, or putting the thing 
in water : this is the only lenfe in which we concede that 
hapti%o fignifies to wafh. Mr. Worcefter fubjoins, < If it be 
faid, that fprinkling or affufion is not wafhing; it may 
alfo, with equal pertinency, be faid, that dipping is not 
waihing.* Here is another of his miftakes : for dipping is, 
in the Bible, in the cafe of Naaman, put for a fpecific kind 
of wafhing ; in one inftance it is called wafhing, and in 
another the fame thing is called dipping. But, if my 
recolledion ferves me, fprinkling is never called wafh- 
ing ; never once fo called, from Genefis to Revelation : 
and all he fays about it is, in my judgment, merely to 
darken counfel by words without knowledge. 

Again, fays he, * If it be faid, that dipping is one mode 
in which wafhing is performed ; it may, in rejoinder, be 
faid, fo alfo is fprinkling or affufion one mode in which 
wafhing is performed ; and that too, the mode in which 
the fcriptures mofl commonly reprefent ceremonial and 
fpiritual wafhings.' But where do the fcriptures fay any 
fuch thing ? Where do they fo much as once mention that 
fprinkling is ceremonial or fpiritual wafhing, or any other 
kind of wafhing ? Mr. Worcefler's fide mufl, indeed, be 
hard prefTed, when, with all his labour, he cannot find fo 
much as a fentence of fcripture, to help him out of his 
increafing difficulty. 

In the next paragraph, he very incautioufly involves 
himfelf in a double difficulty, from which he will not be 
able to extricate himfelf. * ., 

* It is important (fays he) to be remembered, that when 
words are ufed in reference to divine inJlitutiohSi and to fpir- 
itual things, they have an appropriate meaning, which can 
never be determined frorp the meaning which they have in 
their common ufe,' Here two things are highly noticeable. 

I. He implicitly grants, with relation to baptixo, what 
we affirm tp be true, that die common ufe, the plain fenfe, 
of it, is to immerfe ; otherwife, it would nor be important 
10 his purpofe for us to remember, * that when words are 
ufed in reference to divine inflitutions, they have an appro- 
priate meanings which can never be determined from the 
meaning which they have in their common ufe,* For if hap- 
ti%Of in its common ufe, ever mean to fprinkle or affufe, 
whkh Mr. Worcefler tells us, in the preceding page, it may 
2.S properly fignify, as to plunge or Jip, then, if to fprinkle 



Two Difcourfes^ l^c, 79 

©r to pour be baptifm, the word has no appropriate 
meaning 'when ufed in reference to that divine inilitution. 
But, fays he, * It is important to remember, that it has an 
appropriate meaning when ufed in reference to a divine 
intlitution ;' therefore, in its common ufe it can have no 
fuch meaning as to fprinkle or pour. 

2. For more than feventeen hundred years, both the 
learned and the unlearned have, generally, been enveloped 
in neceffary ignorance, as to what the divine inftitution of 
baptifm is ; for few, if any, ever knew, till Mr. Worcefter 
gave the important information^ that they were not to under- 
itand ^fl//ia;o, when ufed with reference to baptifm, in the 
fame fenfe in which it was commonly ufed. The Lord 
hath no where given us this important information ; and 
had it not been for Mr. Worcefter, we had ftill gone on in 
our native and neceflary ignorance. What will Chriftians 
think and fay of this matter ? Pveader, I pray thee confider 
wifely of this. Hath the wife, the compaffionate Lord 
Jefas commanded all who love him to be baptized, and 
in the command, and in the circumftances of the command, 
hath given them no information, but what he intended they 
ftiould obferve, what the common fenfe of the word im- 
ported, while, at the fame^mie, he had an appropriate 
fecret meaning to it \ Does ^rWorcefter think to change 
the laws of Chrift, at this latet^eri&d of-the world ? V7iU 
Chriftians admit fuch a grofs irnpofition, not merely upon 
the Bible and upon common fenie, but upon the Lord of 
both ? Shall the world be always impofed upon by fuch 
bare-faced wickednefs ? He virtually accufes the Chriftian 
Lawgiver with duplicity and deception. The Lord hath 
commanded a divine inftitution, yet in the command hath 
ufed words in an appropriate fenfe, and yet hath given no 
intimation of their being thus ufed ; and thus he hath im- 
pofed upon his poor followers, or elfe Mr. Worcefter hath 
manifeftly accufed, falfely, the Holy One of Ifraei. Will 
Mr. Worcefter blufh and condemn himfelf, for thus abufmg 
the Chrift of God ? or will he ftill juftify himfelf, and fay, 
that the Son of God, who taught man's tongue to fpeak, 
and gave underftanding to the fons of men, hath, in the 
charader of Chriftian Lawgiver, ufed words in fuch an 
appropriate fenfe, that both the learned and the rude, the 
faint and the fmner, were all of them not only equally liable 
to miftake him, but under a natural neceflity to do fo ? For 
Jefus Chrift hath not, in any part of his law or gofpel, tol4 



8o Letters on Rev. S. Worcejier's 

us what this appropriate fenfe is, in which he would have 
lis un^erftand the word baptizo, or to baptize. Nor has he 
fo revealed this to Mr. Worcefter, that he is able to inform 
us with certainty what it is ; at moft, he can, or does, tell 
us nothing more than this — ^It is a very fmall or little im- 
meriion. 

May the long-fuffering Redeemer kindly rebuke and 
graciouily forgive the prefumption of the man, and delivei* 
his ov/n people from fuch grois impositions ! 

I M'ill prefent the public with b«t one more quotation 
from the note under confideration, and it is this, * Should 
any zealous Chriflians (fays he) think it necefTary to make 
literally a feaft, or a full meal, at the Lord's table ; they 
might, with as much propriety, and as much of the Chris- 
tian fpirit, feparate themfelves from the communion of thofe 
who oiily partake of a little bread and wine, and charge 
them withrefufmg to keep the ordinance of the Lord ; as 
thofe, who think it neceflary to be plunged all over in 
water, can feparate themfelves from the communion of 
thofe who have only been baptized by fprinkling, and 
charge them with not keeping the ordinance of the Lord.' 

This is another of his mifreprefentations : for, 
, I. The partaking of a littj^bread and wine, is the plain, 
literal import of the ordinance, or of the elements and cele- 
bration of it ; as is manifeft in the very inftitution of it. 
It was while they were eating and drinking, or after they 
had for a while been eating and drinking, our Lord took 
bread and wine, and gave them to his difciples, as a com- 
memorative ordinance. But, 

2. It is not thus in the ordinance of baptifm. There is 
no fuch intimation, that a very fm.all or partial immerfion 
is, was, or ever fliall be, gofpel baptifm. And as for 
fprinkling, man's fubftitute for gofpel baptifm, there is 
nothing in it v/hich has any fimilarity to the firft. gofpel 
ordinance. There is, therefpre, no likenefs in the two 
cafes which he has put : one is according to the command- 
ment and pattern given, and the other is quite a different 
thing. God's people will one day fee how their leaders 
caufe them to err, 

- In the mean time, I am, for defending the truth, the 
I'eproach of many. 



Two Difcourfes^ ^c, 8i 

We appeal to the Bible^ to Jiubborn fa6fs^ and t9 
common fenfc, 

LETTER IX. 

MEN, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 

1 OU are, no doubt, either tired of Mr. Wor- 
cefter's miftakes and mifreprefentations, or of my correc- 
tions of his departures from fcripture truth, from hiftoric 
facts, and from common fenfe. But, as he has impofed 
upon your credulity, and infulted your want of clafllc 
knowledge and hiftoric information, you will readily bear 
with me a little, whilft I endeavour to remove the blinds 
and uncover the deceptions which hate kept you frora 
feeing the order and ordinances of the church of the Soa 
of God. 

We fhall, for a few minutes, attend upon Mr. Worcefter, 
where he is profeifedly giving us the fcripture account of 
gofpel baptifm. 

In page 70, he introduces the fiibjecft tlius : * In two or 
three inftances we read, (fays he) indeed, of their going 
down into the water, and coming up out of the water ; but 
the original particles, rendered in thefe inftances^ into and 
out of, are as properly, and much more commonly, rendered 
fimply to 3.Tidfrom,* But, I reply, they are never rendered 
to and from, when they refer to the ordinance of baptifm ; 
nor could they be properly ever thus rendered. Accord- 
ingly, the tranflators of the Bible have never, in a fingle 
inftance, adopted Mr. Worcefter's tranflation of them, when 
the ordinance was in queftion. Nor could they with pro- 
priety have ever thus rendered them ; which they would 
have done, if it had been poffible, confiftent with their 
folemn engagement to fidelity : for it was in the reign of 
king James, under whofe patronage they tranflated the 
Bible, that the human lite of fprinkling obtained public 
countenance in England, as a common fubftitute for gofpel 
baptifm. Thefe tranflators could not have failed to have 
admitted Mr. Worcefter*s tranflation, had the connexion 
have juftified fuch a meafure : but in no inftance have they 
done thus. They knew and pra<^ifed better, than to per- 
c 2 



82 Letters^ on Rev, S. W(,fc€jier*s 



V' 



vert the fcriptures by fuch a tranflaticn ; and Mr. Worcef- 
ter ought tQ know better, or fay lefs, for God will not 
always fufier his people to be thus blindly led. 

* But (fays he) it is particularly to be remembered, that 
when they went down to the water, or into the water, it is 
not in a fmgle indance faid how they were there baptized, 
whether by dipping or by fprinkling.' 

Reply. Here let common fenfe fpeak, and fay, if the fol- 
lowing inftances do not exprefs the manner how. They 
were all baptized of him (John) in the river of Jordan. 
Jefus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of 
John 1 14 Jordan. And Jlraightnvay coming up out of the 
water, &c. Buried with Chrift in baptifm. Planted in bap- 
tifm. Buried by baptifm. Raifed with Chrift in baptifm. 
Having our bodies ivaJJoed with pure water, &c.* Is it to 
be particularly remembered, that not in a fmgle inftance, 
when they went down to the water, or into the water, * it 
is not faid hoiv they were there baptized, whether by dip- 
ping or by fprinkiing V It ought, indeed, to be particularly 
known, and then remembered, that not in a fmgle inftance, 
in all the Bible, is fprinkiing fo much as mentioned or inti- 
mated to be the matter or mode of gofpel baptifm. In 
every fmgle inftance, \vhere any dired or circumftantial 
inform.ation is rriven of tlie rpanner how, in baptifm, it 
implies immerfrni, and nothing (hort of it. Befides, the 
very word itfeif, in every inftance, tells us» in- its plain, 
literal, and common fenfe, as Mr. Worcefter implicitly 
allows, that the manner hoiv, in baptifm, was ithmerfion, 

Mr. Worcefter tells us, in his note, page 71, that ' Chrift's- 
baptifm was deligned regularly to introduce him into his 
prieftly office, according to the law of Mofes.' Where did 
Mr. Woicefter obtain this information ? Not in the Bible, 
for that conrra'Jids it : for, fays the apoftle to the Hebrews, 
chap. vii. Chrift " fliculd not be called after the order of 
Aaron. For the priefthood being change d, there is made of 
necejfity a change of the law.— ^Onr Lord fprang out of Juda j 
of which tribe Mofes fpake nothing concerning priefthood." 
Befides, fays the apoftle, our Lord " is made [prieft] not 
tifter the laiv of a carnal commandment^ but after the power 
of an "endlefs life. For he teftifteth, Thou art a prieft for- 
ever, after the order of Melchifedec.^^ But in contradiction 
to the word of God, Mr. Worcefter, that he might deprive 

*Matt. iii. 6. Mark i 5, 9, 10. Rom. ^i 4; 5- Col n, 12. Heb, x, %%, 



Two Difcourfes^ Effr/ ^^ 

Chrifiiaiis of the example of their Lord in baptifm, would, 
without a word of fcripture authority, and contrary from 
every commandment in the Mofaic la'iv oi prieJlhGod^ introduce 
Chrift into his prieftly office according to the law of Mofes. 
Mofss knew nothing about this notion of Mr. Worcefler's ; 
nor would he or his brethren ever have inver,ted it, had 
they not found difficulty in oppofmg the pradice of the 
baptized church. 

We will now hear his conclufion, as to the fcripture 
account of fprinkling for baptifm, and his evidence, as he 
hath fummed it up, pages 72, 73. * Is it not plain (fays 
he) that Jprinkllng is a mode much more properly fignifi- 
cant than dipping ? In reference to the application of the 
blood of Chrift, we never read of dipping or immerfmg, 
but conftantly of fprinkUng or pouring.^ Not fo : for, Rev, 
i. 5. we read of Jefus Chrift, "who loved us, and ivajhed 
u^ from our fins in his own blood^^' But he adds feveral 
paffdges of fcripture, which are nothing to his purpofe, for 
they fay nothing of baptifm : however, the reader Ihall 
have fet before him the pafTages mentioned. They are 
thefe ; — '* Ye are come to the blood of fprinkling. And 
fprinkling of the blood of Chrift. I will pour out my 
Spirit upon all ftefh. I will fprinkle clean water upon you, 
and ye fhall be clean. So fhall he fprinkle many nations." 
* Such (fays he) are the uniform reprefentations of fcrip- 
ture.' What does he here intend ? If his meaning be, what 
his readers v.-ould naturally underftand, by his ftatement of 
the matter, that * fuch are the uniform reprefentations of 
fcripture,' when the ordinance of baptifm is intended or 
fpoken of, then there is not a word of tnitjp in what he 
fays, but juft the reverfe is true ; for there is not one fuch 
reprefentation in all the Bible, when the gofpel ordinance 
of baptiim is mentioned. I will not fay that Mr. Worcefter 
meant to deceive and impofe upon the public, but this I 
will fay, Had this been his. intention, his writings could 
not have appeared more like it. 

His next ftep is, to reafon with his people upon propriety 
and decency y fuppofed order and fokmnityf the very mother of 
this papijiical abomination, of Xhis fprinkling fubjlitute for gofpel 
baptifm. Mr. Worcefter having laboured, and laboured in 
vain, to find one word of God, which mentions fprinkfing 
for the ordinance of baptifm, he would now perfuade his 
people and the public to give their aftent to it upon the 
icore of propriety and decency ^ or upon acco^int of order and 



84 Letters &n Rev, 5. Worcejier's 

fokmnity. What crooked paths are trodden by the blind 
leaders of the blind ! Once was I, as to infant baptifm, ia 
this fame crooked path j but, by the grace of God, 1 am 
what I am* 

Mr. Worcefter, in his note, page 73, tells us, «The quef- 
tion properly between us is not this, whether any were 
baptized, in the days of Chrift and his apoftles, by immer- 
fion or dipping ; but it is precifely this, whether immerfioa 
or dipping be the only valid mode of baptifm.* He has 
defined the que ft ion well, and for a full anfwer, fee my 
Letters to Mr. Auftin. However, I will give a ftiort anfwer 
here, and an anfwer too, which neither Mr. Worcefter nor 
his brethren have been or ever will be able to refute. The 
anfwer is this, — The Bible mode of baptifm is the only 
valid mode. The Bible mode, that which Chrift com- 
manded, and that which the apoftles pradlifed, was immer- 
fion, and immerfion only^ as is evident from this plain 
reafon — Immerfion is the plain, literal, and common fenfe 
of the command, and the plain, literal, and common fenfe 
of the hiftory given of the apoftles' practice is alfo immer- 
fion ; and there is no different or oppofite fenfe to the literal 
meaning of the word, or to the pra<5lice of the apoftles. 
But, fays Mr. Worcefter, * if in the moft extreme cafes, fuch 
as thofe of sickness and imprifonmenty baptifm might be ad- 
miniftered by fprinkling cr affufion, then immerfion is not 
eflential to the ordinance.' I anfwer. Certainly, if there 
be any poflible cafe, in which gofpel baptifm may be ad- 
miniftered in any way otherwife than by immerfion, then 
immerfion is not eifential to the ordinance : but this is the 
very thing to be proved. The Bible, by neither precept, 
example, nor implication, ^ives any liberty for any fuch 
baptifm. Ihe Bible knows nothing of fick-bed baptifm, 
nor of imprifoned baptifm, nor of baptifm by fprinkling or 
affufion. 

After Mr. Worcefter had faid very many things, with 
very little candour, and with lefs regard to veracity and 
fads, he endeavours, page 7/^, to load the Anabaptifts, as 
he terms them, with reproach, and to cover them with 
contempt, by charging to their account feveral fuperfti- 
tious pradtices which look place more than a thoufand years 
before he will allow them even an exiftence. Says he, 
page 66, ^ The Anabaptifts, my brethren, are a fed of 
modern date ; they had their origin fome time after the 
reformation uader Luther and Calvin.' But now, page 



Two D'lfcotirfes^ Iffc. 85 

74, to calumniate the poor Anabaptifts, he charges to their 
reproach what he fays was praftifed by ancient Chriftians, 
He tells us, * When they were baptized by immerlion, they 
were all baptized naked, they were inimerfed three times, 
they were figned with the crofs, and on coming out of the 
water they were clothed in white robes, &c. Let it not be 
faid (fays he) that this was the manner of pcpifh immer- 
fions ; it was _the manner of the earlieft immerfions of 
which we have any account.' 

Now this whole matter, or the fubftance of it, as he has 
flated it, is falfe, from beginnirg to end of it.* But the 
fmgularity of it is, that he fhould lay thefe fuperllitious 
practices to the reproach of the Anabaptifts, who had not 
(if Mr. Worcefter told the truth to his brethren) any exift- 
ence till more than a thoufand years after the introducflion 
of thefe fuperftitions. Befides, what renders it flill more 
fnigular is, the Anabaptifts, as he calls them, have never 
praftifed or approved of the errors with which he reviles 
them ; but his own denomination have for ages, or in dif- 
ferent ages, praclifed the whole of them, as I am ready to 
f|jow at large, if he and his breLhren Vv-ifii me to. It is to 
be remembered, that my propoflil is, to prove that the 
Paedobaptifts are chargeable with, and have pra(ft4ed, all 
the fuperftitious fripperies which Mr. Worcefter unright- 
eoufly and illiberally lays to the reproach of the Anabap- 
tifts. It is not enough for Mr. Worcefter to reproach the 
gofpel ordinance of baptifm, by calling it plunging and 
dipping ; and to give the bapti<2:ed church an ill name, 
which never anfwered to their public fentim.ent, any farther 
than this — when any, who had not received gofpel believ- 
ers' baptifm, wifhed to be of their communion, they ad- 
mini ftered it to him. Yes, it is not enough for him to do 
all this, and to charge to the account of the baptized church 
all the evils which he can fee or hear of them ; but in 
addition, he muft heap upon them the fuperftitious of his 
own profeifed denomination, which took place hundreds of 
years before there was, according to his own afTertions,"" fo 
much as one fociety of BaptiRs, or, as he c^lls them, Ana7 
baptifts, in the wodd, A man who can knowingly, delib- 
erately, and wilfully, be guilty of fuch management, to 
blind his own people, to keep truth out of fight, and to 

* ^ce Booth's Pxdo. Vol II p 109. Mofhelin, Vol. I, p. 200,388. 
Vol. ii,. r-ijt 4. Booth, Vol. I. p, zjS, 263, 265, j&c. 



S6 Letters on Rev. S* WorceJi&r*s 

retain the public mind in the belief of fome of the fuperfti- 
tions of popery, is not deferring of very high reputation, 
among the faithful, though defpifed, followers of the Lamb. 

Mr. Worcefter's exhortation, page 74 — 76, to pa-rental 
falthfulnefs, would be in meafure pleafing, were it not that 
it is founded in error, and broijght to fupport it. He 
reminds parents of their duty, * to bear their children on 
their hearts at the throne of grace, praying with them and 
for them ; faithfully to inftrud them, as they become capa- 
ble of receiving inilru(5lion, in the dodrines and precepts of 
the gofpel,' &c. All this is good ; and it is greatly to be 
dedred, that Chriftians, of whatever name, were more faithful 
in bringing up their children in the nurture and admonition 
of the Lord.. But even where he enforces a gofpel duty, 
he does it from a confideration of his eiToneous principles, 
and not by gofpel injunctions or motives. He tells the 
parents of their bapti%ed children^ the children of the covenant , 
tlie children of the church, the covenant voius of parents 
believingly to truji in the promife of God rejpe&ing their childreny 
&c. Now, we find not a word of all this in the gofpel, 
with relation to hapti%ed unbelieving children. 

In pages 78, 79, Mr. Worcefler has feveral things, which 
deferve to be repeated in the public hearing, and to be 
noticed by every perfon concerned in the prefent contro- 
verfy. Says he, * God forbid, my brethren, that in refpeft 
to any denomination or fe6t of profeffing Chriftians, we 
fhould ever difplay any thing like a fpirit of perfccution, or 
even uncharitablenefs.' 

We do not accufe Mr. Worcefter of calling upon the 
fecular poiuery to wage direft and bloody perfecution upon 
any fedt or denomination of Chriftians ; but we appeal to 
all who are converfant with the hiflory of perfecution s, if 
he have not manifefted the very fpirit which hath attended 
them ? Has it not ever been the cafe, in all perfecutiens, 
that the perfecutors have faid many if not all kinds of 
evil, falfeljy again ft the perfecuted, and then proceeded to 
other more violent fteps ? Mr. Worcefter hath already faid 
many evil things, /7^t/j?, againft the Antipsedobaptifts ; and 
in the very next fentence to the one juft quoted, he impli- 
citly charges them, and very unjuftly too, with feveral great 
evils. Says he, * So far as they difcover an adherence to 
the truth, a regard for true religion, and a zeal for God 
according to knowledge, we will approve and love them ; 
t)ut wherein they depart from the truths do 'Vfrong to the 



Two Difcourfes^ l^c. 87 

caufe oi religion, and difpUy the unhallott^d fplrit o£ party ^yre 
will bear, as we are enabled and have occafion, our tefti- 
mony againft them.* 

All this might be taken in a good knSe, but what he fays 
in the two next paragraphs fliows in what fenfe this is to 
be taken. In the firft of the two paragraphs he infmuates, 
that we are not contending or concerned for the caufe of 
truth, but only for the caufe of a party. But In the next 
paragraph, he acciifes us roundly, and moft explicitly, 
though falfely, of fome of the worft of herefies. * l^erely 
(fays he) a denial of the external rite of baptifm to the 
infant feed of believers, though in itfelf exceedingly repre- 
henfible^ as it is a denial of an important divine inftitutiony 
is, however, but a fmall part of the error of our Antipaedo- 
baptift brethren. They deny God's everlqfting covenant of 
fuper abounding grace, the grand charter of the inheritance and 
privileges of his people, and the fource of hlejfings to all the kin* 
dreds of the earth. They deny the church of God, which nvas 

formed in the family of Abraham, and which • is deflined to 

rij^ ------ and become the joy of the univerfe. The grand 

provi/ion, which, in his infinite wifdom and grace, Jehovah has 
been pleafed to make, for the prefervation of a righteous feed on 
the earth, and for the maintenance and promotion, from age to 
age, of his caufe and kingdom in this hofiile world, they not only 
deny, but openly contemn. They deny and contemn the grace^ 
which is fo kindly and fo condefcendingly offered, for the fpir- 
itual renovation and everlajling fahation of the seed of the 
church* The great body of God^s vifible profejfing people, even 
the moft enlightened and the mofl faithful, for hundreds of 
years, they utterly fet afide, as conftituting no part of the 
true church of Chrift, but only a part of Antichrift. — The 
flrong bond of connexion between the Old and New Teflament 
fcriptures, they, in a manner, deflroy. The beautiful plan of 
divine wifdom and grace, exhibited in the covenant, they ex- 
eeedingly mar ; and the myflical body of Chrifl, declared in his 
word to be one, they rend in twain I ' 

Thefe accufations, and misftated and falfe charges, we 
confider to comprife as notorious a libel againft the baptized 
church of Chrift, as was dver m«de out by a Spanifti inqui- 
fition, againft the fame kind of reputed or pretended heretics* 
Here we are accufed of denying 3. divine in/iitution, of deny- 
ing God's everlafting covenant of grace, and the church of 
God. We are accufed of not only denying, but of openly con- 
femning, the grand provi/ion which Jehovah hath made, for 



88 Letters en Rev. S. Worcejier^s 

the prefervlng a righteous feed on the earth ; and of denying 
and contemning the grace which, as Mr. Worcefter fays, is 
offered for the fpiritual renovation and everlajiing fahatton of 
the feed of the church. We are accufed of utterly fetting 
afide God's 'vijible people, even the moft enlightened and the 
mq/i faithful of them, as being in the church of Antichrift ; 
and not only fo, but we do, in a manner, (unlefs Mr. Wor-, 
cefter fpeak falfely) deftroy the connexion between the Old 
and New Teftament fcriptures, exceedingly mar the beau- 
tiful plan of divine ivifdom and grace, and rend in tivain th6 
myflical body of Chrifl. This is the fum, though not all, of 
the charge wnich Mr. Worcefter, of Salem, hath feen fit to 
lay at the door of the baptized church. Quite fimilar is 
it to that w^hich the felf-righteous Scribes and Pharifees 
brought againft our baptized Head and Lord ; and of the 
fame kind, yet worfe, than the charge which they brought 
againft Paul, when they judged him to be worthy of death, 
for oppofmg the very errors which Mr. Worcefter is labour- 
ing to uphold, and for vindicating thofe new-covenant 
principles and privileges which I have endeavoured to ef. 
tabliih. But it happens to us, as it happened to our Lord,' 
and as it hath ever happened to his faithjQal followers, they 
are unable to prove the things whereof they accufe us. 

Their accufations are equally falfe, and appear equally 
malignant, with thofe, with which our baptized brethren 
have been wickedly charged from John the Baptift's day 
to ours. But, fays Mr. Worcefter, ' God forbid, my breth- 
ren, that we ftiould ever difplay any thing Hke a perfecut- 
ing fpirit.' But let the reader, for a moment, afk what 
is a perfecuting fpirit ? Can any thing be more like it, 
than ^ve falfe and inflammatory accufations brought againft any 
man, or fet of men, in order to ftir up the multitude againft 
the accufed ? efpecially when the accufed is charged with 
fpeaking againft God, againft his^r^rr^, divine inflitution, fa- 
cred ivord, and againft his vifihle people ? Yea, againft the 
beft of them, againft the moil enlightened and the mofl faith' 
ful of them ? and when the accufed are charged with mar- 
ring the plan of divine ivifdom, of rending in twain the church 
of Chrifti and of holding to fuch error and fuch wrong, as 
muft be exceedingly injurious to the caufe oi religion and deeply 
'wounding to Chrift and the members of his body ! Is not 
the very next ftep, to profcribe thefe heretics, and would 
there be any thing to hinder their receiving from \he\r falfe 
^^dfelffh accvfsrs fuch puuilhmejit, as would deter, for the 



ii 



Two Difcourfes^ l^'c, 89 

future ; provided thofe old perfecuting laws could be re- 
vived, which once imprifoned, beat and baniihed from Bof- 
ton, Saletrif and from the limitsr of this now free State, the 
tvsr acfpifedj falfsly accufed, and perfecuted followers of the 
-Lamb of God I 

The fum of what I propofed to fay upon Mr. Worcefler's 
Sermons is now faid. V/hat remains will be included un- 
der the following particulars, as dedu<5lions from the fubjedl. 

I. One very natural conclufion is, that Mr. Worcefter's 
Sermons are little elfe but one continued fophifm, or falfe 
argumentation. ^ 

We appeal to the reader, to the public, to judge if he 
have produced one text from the Bible, one fupported faft 
from hiftory, or one fair argument, which common fenfe 
(hall fay touches his main object, or fo much as makes it 
probable, that the gcfpel church is but the Jeivijh church 
continued ? 

We appear to the reader, to the public, to judge if hf^ 
have produced one text from the Bible, one fupported fa<5{: -^ 
from hiftory, one full and fair argument, which common 
fenfe ihall fay gives folidity, or the ftamp of truth, to one 
of his fecondary fubjecls, fuch as infant haptifm^ infant church- 
memberfhip, fprlnkling or pouring for baptifm, i!fc. 

The queftion, referred to the reader, and to the public, 
for judgment, is not this, whether Mr. Worcefter hath 
ajferted thefe things, or whether he attempted to prove 
them ; but the queftion is, Hath he produced fo much as 
one text of fcripture, which commands thefe things, or 
which informs us, that either of thefe things was ever prac- 
tifed upon by Chrift, or by his difciples ; or hath he pro- 
duced one fupported fadt from hiftory, which informs us that 
the church of Chrift ever believed or pracflifed thefe things ? 
or that any church did, till not far from the year 250, 
when the baptized church began to occupy her wildernefs 
ftation ? At which time fhe left the unbaptized, or the er- 
roneoufly baptized, church of Antichrift to pradife at her 
pleafure ? t)r has he produced one fair and full argument, 
which proves in the judgment of common fenfe, that J:hefe 
things were ever appointed by Chrift, or pradlifed by bis 
gofpel church ? Let the Bible, let ftubbom fads, let com- 
mon fenfe fpeak, and be hearc| too ; but let not the public 
be deceived, nor the truth of God run down, nor the church 
of Ghrift fet at nought, by the fophiftry of any man. 



90 Letters on Rev. S. Worcejier^s 

2. Another natural inference is, That Mr. Worcefter 
hath, in fo many inllances, publifhed untruths, and thus, 
ignorantly or defignedly, impofed upon the credulity of 
the public, that he will have no occafion to take it un- 
kindly, fhould they refufe, in future, to take his fmgle evi- 
dence in any matter of high concernment. 

The beft apology v^^hich can be made for him, is, he 
undertook to write upon a fubjed, the merits of which he 
little underftood ; and to aflert things without examining, 
and before he had time to difcover, whether they had an 
agreement or difagreement with truth. 

3. One of the following things appears evident from 
the preceding Letters. Either firft, that the author of them 
hath not met Mr. Worcefler's arguments, reafonings, and 
affertions fairly, or fecondly, that Mr. Worcefter's Sermons 
are one continued feries of faJfe affertions, and falfe argu- 
mentations. The public are requefted to deliberate candidly 
and judge righteoufly between the two. 

^ Should Mr. Worcefter fee fit to make any defence for 
himfelf, then every friend to truth is earneftly defired to 
examine wifely, that he may not be deceived by a like 
courfe of erroneous affertions, and delufory arguments. 
For it will remain forever true, that two fides of a con- 
tradidion can never be fupported by folid reafonings 
founded in fads. 

4. Should the author be charged with repetitions, his 
apology is what the reader has probably noticed, he had 
to reply to one great error, turned into a variety of ftiapes. 

It is but fmall bufmefs for an author to fill his pages 
"with the incapacity and repetitions of his opponent. For 
children and fools may fpeak the truth ; and if the repeti- 
tions be many, a folid anfwer to one will do the buffjiefs 
for the whole. 

5. It is very eafy to account for the wide difference 
between Mr. Worcefler and the author of thefe pages. 
They are defending the out- works of two different churches. 
One, the church of Antichrift ; the other, the church of 
Chrift. 

The reader will obferve, I do not fay, Mr. Worcefter is 
not a Chriftian ; but this is what I fay, he is within the lim- 
its of Antichrift's church, and is labouring hard to defend 
her principles and pradices ; and if he be one of God's 
people, the command to him is, « Come out of her.'' For 



Two Difcour/es^ ^c, 91 

the prefent he is a partaker of her fins, and he may receive 
of her plagues. 

6. Another inference is, that the author of thefe pages 
is highly cenfurable for rebuking Mr. Worcefter fo fliarply 
before all men, unlefs Mr. Worcefter have fmned openly. 
Yes, reader, if Mr. Worcefter have not aimed his ihafts 
againft the church of the Lord Jefus, and been pleading 
for the abominations of the mother of harlots, I am not 
only ignorant of the fubje(5l, on which I write, but I have 
rebuked him in fome inftances with too much feverity. 
Yet, he would be worthy of rebuke for contradicting fcrip- 
ture, ftubborn fads and common fenfe, even were he, on 
the whole, defending the truth. But I appeal to the reader, 
if it be not juft to rebuke him, as I have done, or, if he be 
not worthy of all this rebuke, and if he be not in danger of 
receiving m(H*e, provided the accufations, which I have laid 
to his charge, be abundantly fupported, and he be guilty 
of the whole and more. 

Conclujien, What I have written upon the fubjeds, 
which occupy the preceding pages, is not the production 
of inattention. I have deliberated ferioufly on what I 
have done. 

It is, reader, no fmall thing, wnth me, to forego all that 
efteem and friendfhip, which 1 once pofTeffed in the bofom of 
many, whom I now efteem to be the people of God, though 
in a great error, within the hmits of Antichrift, and, for 
the prefent, difobedient to the heavenly dire6lion to come 
9ut of her. To bedefpifed, to be fet at nought, and to have 
all manner of evil faid againft me falfely, is, in itfelf, no 
fmall trial ; but feeing thefe things have hitherto been the 
lot of thofe who have been God's honoured inftruments to 
fpread and vindicate his meflages of grace, at times, I re- 
joice and a,n exceeding giad. 

If I miftake not, it is my conftitutional habit to be mild 
and affable, where and when I may ; and hard and cenfori- 
ous only where and when I muft. When I firft faw, that 
I muft join and advocate the caufe of the baptized church, 
my mind was filled, in meafure, with the fcorn, reproach, 
and reviling, w^hich would fall to my (hare from the ene- 
mies of Jefus, and from his mifguided friends. But my 
mind was not difmayed at the fight ; nor is it at all dif- 
mayed at the reception of thofe evils, which the Captain of 
Salvation hath taught me to expert. I am, indeed, neither 
afhamed of the gofpel, nor of its reproach. 



92 Letters^ Iffc. 

Let the reader remember, if he would ft are in the bleC- 
ings of the gofpel, he muft v/illingly partake ©f its reproach 
alfo. The world hated Chrift before it hated Chriftians ; 
and if they have called the mafter of the houfe Beelzebub, 
how much more them of his houfebold ? 

I have now faid to the public what I purpofed at this 
time. My defire and prayer to God are, that truth may 
gain ground, and be acceptable to the public ; and that 
error may be made alhamed, and hide its hurtful and guil- 
ty head. 

I have not come to the public with excellency of fpeech> 
cr of man's wifdom, but with the fimple attire of Truth, 
that the unlearned might read and underftand. He that 
hath an ear to hear, let him hear. 

In the mean tim.e, I am, and hope dill to be, fmcerely the 
public's, in defence of the glorious gofpel of the 
Lord Jefus Chrift, 

DANIEL MERRILL. 

StoawicK., October a;, 1806. 



END. 



V 

OCT" In feveral parts of the foregoing Letters j the intelligent 
reader ma'ill obferve a remarkable coincidence betnveen the argu^ 
ments contained In thefe fieets, and thofe ivhlch are ttfed In Dr. 
Baldwin's Reply to Mr. WoRCEsrERi lately puhlijhed. The 
public are ajfured, that neither Dr. Balbwin nor Mr. Mekriil 
faw each other* s arguments till they appeared in print. 



BOOKS 

For f ale by Manning ^ Loring, 

1^0. ^, Cornhilly Bofon, 



THE BAPTISM OF BELIEVERS ONLY, 
and the PARTICULAR COMMUNION of ihe 
Baptist Churches, explained and vindicated. In Three 
Parts. The firft— publilhed originally in 1789 ; the fec- 
ond — in 1794; the third — an Appendix, containing addi- 
tional Obfervations and Arguments, v^ith Stri<5tares oa 
feveral late Publications. By Thomas Baldwin. 

\_Pnce one doL 12\ cts, 

CONTAINING, 

PART L 

Section I. — Remarks on the unfriendly afperfions caft 
upon the Baptifts, for refufing communion with other 
denominations — The gofpel dod^rine of a church and 
qualification of the members — With flridures on baptifm. 

Section II. — The impr6priety of the Baptift churches 
communicating with thofe of other denominations con- 
fidered, and their difference in fentiment more particu- 
larly pointed out. ^ 

Section III. — The arguments for free communion con- 
fidered — others offered in vindication of the clofe com- 
munionifts. ' 

PART IL 

Section I. — Preliminary obfervations on the fubjed in 

difpute. 
Section II. — Profefied believers the only appointed fub- 

je(5ls of baptifm. 
Section III. — Whether John's baptifm belonged to the 

Jewifh or Chriftian difpenfation, particularly confidered. 
Section IV. — The mode of baptifm, and its connexion 

with the fubje<5l in difpute, particularly confidered. 
Section V. — The mode of baptifm • farther illuftrated, 

from the practice of the primitive Chriftians ; and the 

manner in which it was reduced from immerfioa to 

fprlnkling, briefly pointed out. 



Books for fale by Manning £sf Loring. 

Section VI. — Godly fmcerity, as connefled with external 
obedience, confidered. 

Section VII. — Whether there be any morality in exter- 
nals or feniiments ; and whether fincerity of heart fecures 
the judgment from error ; briefly confidered. 

Section Vlil. — Whether the divine condu(5t towards us 
be the rule of duty towards our Chriftian brethren, 
rather than God's revealed will, briefly confidered. 

Section IX. — Obfervations on the plan of communion 
propofed in the " Friendly Letter," with remarks on 
feveral other things conne^ed with the fubjedl. 

Section X. — Several objections particularly anfwered. 
The fubjedl concluded. 

APPENDIX. 

Section I. — Introductory obfervations on the fubje(?t un- 
der confideration. 

Section II. — The arguments for infant memberfhip in 
the gofpel church, inferred from the covenant of circum- 
cifion, confidered. 

Section III. — Whether the Jewifh and Chriftian churches 
are the fame ; or whether the latter is a diftin<?t church, 
or a mere continuation of the former, confidered. 

Section IV. — Stridlures on the Rev. Peter Ednvards'*s 
" Candid Reafons for renouncing the Principles of Anti- 
paedobaptifm." 

Section V. — Strictures on Two Difcourfes on the perpe- 
tuity and provifion of God's gracious covenant with 
Abraham and his feed. By Samuel Worcejler, a. m. 
Paftor of the Tabernacle Church in Salem. 

Section VI The Baptifts vindicated from the charges 

brought againfl: them by the Rev. Samuel Worcejler. 

Section VII. — Strictures on the obfervations of the Rev. 
Mr. Worcejler^ Dr. Ofgood, and others, upon the mode of 
baptifm. 

Section VIII. — The principles of open communion ex- 
amined. The fubjeCt concluded. 

(C/" The Appendix, containing i8o pages never before 
publifhed, may be bought feparately, price bound and 

lettered 62^ cents, or 50 cents ftitched in blue. The 

Authors whofe writings againft the Baptifts are more par- 
ticularly noticed in this Appendix, are — Rev. Samuel Wdr- 
cefter, of Salem — Dr. Ofgood, of Medford — Rev. Samuel 
Auftinf of Worcefter, and Rev. Peter Edwards. 



Books for fale by Manning £5* Loring, 
The Second Edition of SEVEN SERMONS 

on the Mode and Subjects of Baptifm. By Daniel 
Merrill, a. m, \_Prke 37^ cents* 



OPEN COMMUNION with all who keep 

the Ordinances as Chrift delivered them to the faints. — 
Eight Letters to Rufus Anderfon^ A. m. By Daniel 
Merrill, a. m. \JPrice 25 cents. 

TWELVE LETTERS, addreffed to Rev. 

Samuel jiuftin, A. M. in which his Vindication of partial 
Wafhing for Chriftian Baptifm, contained in Ten Letters, 
is reviewed and difproved. By Daniel Merrill, a. m. 

[_Price 31J cents. 

The CHRISTIAN BANNER.— A Sermon, 

preached before the Lincoln Baptized Aflbciation. By 
Daniel Merrill, a, m. [^Price i2\cents. 

A Candid EXAMINATION of the Moral 

Tendency of the Dodrine of Univerfal Salvation, as taught 
by its Advocates. By Elisha Andrews, Paftor of a 
Church in Templeton. [^Price 62\ cents. 



A VINDICATION of the Diftinguifliing Sen- 

timents of the Baptifts, againft the Writings of Meflrs. 
Coiules, Miller, and Edwards, ByELiswAANDREWs, a. m. 

[^Price 50 cents in blue, 

Bunyan'b pilgrim's PROGRESS, with 

Original Notes, Preface, Life of the Author, and copious 
Index to the whole, by Thomas Scott, Chaplain to the 
Lock Hofpital, and author of Original Notes and Praftical 
Obfervations on the Scriptures. (With four copperplates.) 

eCj* The Notes add greatly to the value t)f this edition, 
and are exceedingly interefting to the inteUigent reader ; 
aflfording a happy guide to the meaning of the author in 
his allegory. The Rev. Mr, Scott is a man of knov^rn 
piety, and of critical knowledge in theological literature. 
The w^ork contains nearly 400 pages, the Notes occupy 
about one-third. \Price one dol, 25 r/x. 



Books for fale by Manning ^ Loring. ^ 
The Doclrine of the Law and Grace unfolded. 

Being a Difcourlc (hewing the different natures of the Law 
and Gofpel ; and the very diffimilar ftates of thofe who aie 
\inder the Law, and thofe who are under Grace, or interefted 
in Jefus Chrift. By John Bunyan, 

l^Prtce one dollar. 

The Death of Legal Hope the Life of Evan- 
gelical Obedience. By Abraham Booth. , 

[_Prke ^i cents Jiitched, ^ 



Mr. Fuller's ESSAY on TRUTH ; contain-' 

ing an Inquiry into its Nature and Importance, with the 
Caufes of Error, and the Reafons of its being permitted. 

Preiident Maxcy's DISCOURSE, defignedi 

to explain the DoaHne of ATONEMENT. f, 

\_Boih Jlitched together In blue, price 25 cents, '! 

The Second Edition of the PSALMODlST'sj; 

ASSISTANT: containing an Original CompoHtion oi'l; 
Pfalm and Hymn Tunes ; togetlier wnth a Number ofji 
Favourite Pieces from different Authors. To which isij 
prefixed, an Introdudion to the Grounds of Mufic. By:; 
Abijah Forbush. , j;' 

\Price 62I cents, ij; 



jujl received^ and for fale as above-, 

Dr. Samuel Shepard's Examination of th(;|i| 

Account lately pubhftied by Mr. Elias Smith, in two pam'ii! 
phlets, relpeding Original Sin j the Death Adam was to i^ 
die the day he ate the forbidden fruit ; and the final end o; : 
the Wicked after the Refurredlion Day. — In an EpilUe Xx^^ 
the faid Elias Smith. )- 

[_Price 25 cents. 



jfufl received from New Tork, 

CoLLiNs's Second Edition of the Quarts 
BIBLE,, whh Ostervald's Notes, Plates, and Concoi ' 

ance. -f^ 

Ct* Collinses Bible has obtained celebrity as being thi?:; 

moft corred of any ever printed in America. ;^' 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Sept. 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



